Pennsylvania's filial support statute is not preempted by the Nursing Home Reform Act, and debt created by the statute does not give rise to a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim, according to a U.S. district court. Eades v. Kennedy, PC Law Offices (U.S. Dist. Ct., W.D. N.Y., No. 12-CV-6680L, Dec. 3, 2013).
Levere Pike, a New York resident, placed his wife in a Pennsylvania nursing home. After Mr. Pike's wife died, the nursing home hired a law firm that attempted to collect payment from his daughter, Joni Eades. The law firm eventually filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania that is still pending.
Mr. Pike and Ms. Eades sued the law firm, arguing that the attempts to collect the debt violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). They also argued that Pennsylvania’s filial responsibility law is preempted by the portion of the Nursing Home Reform Act (NHRA) that prohibits a nursing home from requiring a third-party guarantee as a condition of admission. The law firm filed a motion to dismiss.
The U.S. District Court, Western District of New York, grants the motion to dismiss, holding the court does not have jurisdiction over Mr. Pike and Ms. Eades' claims. The court goes on to conclude that even if it did have jurisdiction, debts created by filial support statutes do not give rise to claims under the FDCPA. In addition, according to the court, the filial support statute is not preempted by the NHRA because the two laws do not "cover the same territory."
For the full text of this decision, go to: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15862696241722775624&q=Eades+v.+Kennedy,+P.C.+Law+Offices&hl=en&as_sdt=6,39
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 2,000 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
