.png)
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has just issued a decision in Christina Steets (deceased) v. Celebration Fireworks Inc., specifically overturning longstanding case law regarding whether specific loss benefits are payable after an employee’s death from causes related to the work injury.
In 2017, Claimant Christina Steets was injured during the course of her employment with Celebration Fireworks Inc. The employer accepted liability for her temporary total disability benefits under the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act by filing a Notice of Compensation Payable (NCP) in 2018. In 2019, Claimant filed Claim and Review Petitions seeking to amend the description of her injuries in the NCP and requesting specific loss benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Judge amended the NCP and granted her Petition for specific loss benefits. Both decisions—granting specific loss benefits and amending the NCP—were affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB) and the Commonwealth Court.
However, Claimant died from her injuries while the Commonwealth Court’s decision was pending. Thereafter, Steets’ estate filed Claim and Review Petitions seeking payment of, inter alia, the specific loss benefits that had been awarded but were still subject to appellate review at the time of her death. The Workers’ Compensation Judge denied the estate’s claims beyond payment of funeral expenses, and the WCAB affirmed that decision. The Commonwealth Court then affirmed in a split en banc decision, ruling—pursuant to Estate of Harris v. WCAB (Sunoco Inc.), 845 A.2d 239 (Pa. Cmwlth 2004)—that Claimant’s specific loss benefits did not survive her work-related death. In a matter of first impression, the Supreme Court was asked to overrule Estate of Harris and award the specific loss benefits due to Claimant to her estate.
In Pennsylvania, a Claimant who is receiving ongoing temporary total disability benefits cannot also collect specific loss benefits. However, if a specific loss injury results in a disability that is separate and distinct from what normally follows such an injury—and that disability directly results from the injury—then benefits for total disability are allowed in addition to benefits for specific loss. See Pocono Mountain School District v. WCAB (Easterling), 113 A.3d 909 (Pa. Cmwlth 2015). When an employee is totally disabled from an injury separate and apart from the specific loss sustained in the same incident, benefits for the specific loss follow the period of temporary total disability benefits. See 77 P.S. § 513.
Prior to this decision, if a Claimant died from causes other than the work injury, the remaining weekly benefits for specific loss were payable to surviving dependents. If no lifetime benefits had been paid, the surviving dependents could file a claim after the employee's death. If there were no surviving eligible dependents, benefits were payable only up to the amount of reasonable funeral expenses, as provided in 77 P.S. § 541(7).
If a Claimant died from causes unrelated to the work injury, the surviving dependents had the same right to elect to receive the remaining specific loss benefits. See Reed v. WCAB (Stork Diaper Services, Inc.).
In this case, the courts initially found that because Claimant died from work-related injuries, her estate was not entitled to payment of specific loss benefits, and only funeral expenses were awarded.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court overturned Estate of Harris v. WCAB (Sunoco Inc.), 845 A.2d 239 (Pa. Cmwlth 2004). The Court specifically found that, regardless of the manner of death, the estate is entitled to the specific loss benefits awarded to the Claimant.
This ruling expands the ability of beneficiaries—or a Claimant’s estate—to receive specific loss benefits post-death.
In this particular case, Claimant was awarded compensation for the loss of both of her arms for all practical intents and purposes, which would have entitled her to 840 weeks of specific loss benefits.
This case is significant for situations where a Claimant is receiving ongoing temporary total disability benefits, is also awarded specific loss benefits, and later dies from injuries—whether related or unrelated to the work injury.
It should also be noted that in this case, the sole beneficiary of Claimant’s estate was her nondependent sister. There were no eligible beneficiaries entitled to death benefits under the Act.
This decision significantly alters how specific loss benefits may be handled following a claimant’s death, with potential implications for settlement strategy, claims management, and litigation posture. Employers, carriers, and third-party administrators should carefully review their current practices to ensure compliance with this updated precedent. If you have questions about how this ruling may impact your claims, Chartwell’s workers’ compensation team is here to help. Please contact us to learn more.
