Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Against Son In Nursing Home Bill Case

John Pittas’s mother was placed in a nursing home for rehabilitation after she was injured in car accident. When she left the nursing home, she left a bill of $93,000 that went unpaid. The nursing home brought a suit against John alleging that he was liable to pay his mother’s bill because of the state’s filial law. Pennsylvania’s filial support law “requires a child to provide support for an indigent parent.” Both the lower and the appellate court found Mr. Pittas liable because of the state’s filial law. The courts rejected most of his arguments, including that the courts should consider alternative forms of payment such as Medicaid.

In Health Care & Retirement Corp v. Pittas, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania denied his petition for an appeal affirming the decision of the lower courts. It may come as a surprise, there are a number of states, 29 to be exact, that have filial laws. Most filial laws are not enforced. What makes Pennsylvania’s statute unique is that it provides a cause of action for third parties to seek damages from the adult children of indigent parents. At this moment, there appears to be a shift in the general thought in Pennsylvania. Currently, there are bills introduced to appear the state’s filial laws. The outcome at this time is uncertain. Provided here is a link to the lower court’s decision.

See Pa. High Court Lets Stand Ruling That Son Is Liable For Mother’s Nursing Home Bill Under Support Law, Elder Law Answers, 2013.

Special thanks to Katherine Owens (Executive Comment Editor, Vol. 5, Estate Planning & Community Property Law Journal, Texas Tech School of Law, J.D. Candidate 2013) for bringing this article to my attention.