Summary
In DeGuffroy the employer filed a modification petition, contending that the claimant's status had changed insofar as her income exceeded her expenses.
Summary of this case from Broadwood C. v. W.C.A.BOpinion
Argued March 13, 1980
June 5, 1980.
Workmen's compensation — Dependency — Capital expenditures — Monthly expenses — Parents.
1. In determining monthly expenses of the parent of a deceased child, contributed to by the child prior to his death, in order to ascertain the degree of dependency of that parent, house maintenance expenses necessary to maintain the current value of the family home are properly included but expenses for the purchase of furniture are capital expenditures not properly included. [60]
2. In determining whether a parent was dependent upon a child and eligible for workmen's compensation benefits when the child dies as a result of a compensable injury, the test to be applied is whether the child's earnings were necessary to provide the parent with some of the ordinary necessities in keeping with his station in life and whether the parent was in fact dependent upon the child at the time of the fatal injury. [61]
Argued March 13, 1980, before President Judge CRUMLISH and Judges ROGERS and CRAIG, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 1406 C.D. 1979, from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Catherine C. Bianchetti, mother of Joseph Bianchetti, deceased v. DeGuffroy and Associates, Inc., No. A-75883.
Petition with the Department of Labor and Industry for workmen's compensation death benefits. Petition dismissed. Petitioner appealed to the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board. Compensation awarded for partial dependency. Employer and insurer appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed in part. Case remanded for recomputation of benefits.
H. Reginald Belden, Jr., Stewart, Belden, Herrington Belden, for petitioners.
Donald R. Rigone, Fisher, Long Rigone, for respondents.
The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) awarded partial benefits to Catherine C. Bianchetti for the death of her son. DeGuffroy Associates, Inc., and Westmoreland Casualty Company (Employer) appeal. We affirm in part and remand for computation of benefits in accordance with this opinion.
At issue are the items and amounts used to determine Bianchetti's monthly expenses and degree of dependency.
First, Employer erroneously challenges the inclusion of $153.00 for real estate repair as part of monthly expenses.
In WJAC, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 39 Pa. Commw. 488, 395 A.2d 710 (1979), this Court held that capital expenditures, which included a $500 new bathroom, $2072 new house siding and a $1000 stereo, could not validly be chargeable only to the year preceding the death of the decedent.
In the case at bar, the items claimed are not capital expenditures adding to the valuation of the property, but are items such as a rain spout, new roof and paint necessary to maintain the home's current value. Therefore, their inclusion as part of monthly costs was proper.
Second, Employer correctly challenges that the Board's inclusion of $30 for furniture as a monthly expense was improper. Furniture is a capital expenditure controlled by our holding in WJAC, supra.
Third, Employer incorrectly argues that the household utility expenses and repair costs must be allocated among the members of the household, here Mrs. Bianchetti, her daughter, and the decedent, to determine each party's fair share and to reflect the percentage decrease in such costs if Bianchetti lived alone.
Bianchetti established that her monthly costs for such items were:
Gas $ 35.00 Household repairs 153.00 Electricity 25.00 Water 6.10
The Board concluded that these were a fair assessment of the average cost of running the household. Employer introduced no evidence to contradict this finding or to show that such costs would be diminished if Bianchetti resided alone. Findings of fact, if supported by competent evidence, will not be disturbed on review.
The test for dependency is twofold: whether a child's earnings were necessary to provide the parent with some of the ordinary necessities in keeping with his station in life; and whether the parent was in fact dependent upon the child at the time of the fatal accident. Leipziger v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 12 Pa. Commw. 417, 315 A.2d 883 (1979).
Excluding the $30 per month for furniture, Bianchetti had monthly expenses of at least $322.43 and a monthly social security income of $280. Therefore, the Board properly concluded that she was partially dependent upon the contributions of the deceased for support.
And $75.00/mo. travel expense.
Computed as follows:
Food $ 85.00/1 mo. Lodge 3.33 Gas 35.00 Church 10.00 Repairs 153.00 Medical 5.00 Electric 25.00 Water 6.10 Clothing 20.00 ______ Total $342.43
Accordingly, we
ORDER
AND NOW, this 5th day of June, 1980, the decision of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, Docket No. A-75883, dated June 7, 1979, awarding partial dependency benefits to Catherine C. Bianchetti is affirmed and the case is remanded to the Board for a computation of benefits in accordance with this Order.