There is a basic truth to the law: only people who are alive can participate in the legal system. That seems axiomatic perhaps, but similarly only people that are alive can enter into contracts. That said, the "people" do not have to be breathing people, they can be "fictitious" persons such as corporations and similar entities. However, those entities likewise must be in existence to enter contracts and participate in litigation. Furthermore, those fictitious entities must act through agents to make contracts or participate in legal proceedings.
A recent news story (subscription) directed me to a decision by the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, City of Gadsdenv.Lillie Billingsley, (CV-10-900283.80); December 21, 2018. The Court's decision is interesting for several reasons, but this post is focused on death and the disability that results.
The litigation in the underlying case began with a 2008 motor vehicle accident. Two years later, a workers' compensation claim was filed in civil court. Alabama is the only state in the country that has not adopted an administrative workers' compensation process. In Alabama workers' compensation cases are managed and adjudicated alongside other civil claims for tort, contract, dissolution of marriage, probate, and more.
The litigation took substantial time. It traveled from the trial court to the appellate court in 2015 and was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. A remand is merely an instruction from the appellate court that the trial judge should take further (different) action, from some specific discreet thing to perhaps retrying the case. In this instance, the trial judge thereafter entered a May 17, 2018 judgment in the case. Counsel for the employer filed a second appeal to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. The Court reversed the trial court and remanded once again.
Thus, on the third try, the trial court undertook further proceedings, and a "status conference" was held. There, the injured worker's attorney "acknowledged in open court that the employee had died in January 2019 from causes unrelated to her work-related accident." Thereafter, the attorney "filed a 'suggestion of death,'" formalizing notice to the trial court that the injured worker was no longer living.
The Employer in the case responded then, and "moved to dismiss the employee's claim," asserting that her entitlement to benefits "had terminated upon her death." The trial judge agreed, granted the motion, and dismissed the case. The attorney for the injured worker filed documents to seek clarification from the trial court and then filed "a notice of appeal from the judgment in the employer's favor." Notably, the attorney named "the employee as the sole appellant."
The Appellate Court on its third consideration of the case noted the substantive arguments raised regarding the trial court's conclusions. It elected, however, "not (to) reach the merits of those arguments." The Court concluded instead that it did not have jurisdiction over the case. Following Alabama Supreme Court precedent, the Court explained that the appeal is "a nullity." There is no appeal, it explained, because "the appellant was deceased when the notice of appeal was filed." Therefore, the jurisdiction of the Court was not invoked by filing the notice of appeal. The appeal could only be filed by, or on behalf of, a living person or fictitious entity.
There certainly was a contract between the injured worker and the attorney who filed the appeal. However, "an attorney's authority to act on behalf of a client ceases on the death of that client." This is consistent with the concept of agency generally. If a person delegates authority to someone to act on their behalf, that delegation cannot continue if the person delegating ceases to be. The attorney, as agent, acts on behalf of and at the direction of the principal, the person. When the person ceases, the agency and authority likewise cease. The Court concluded that the client's death, the absence of a living client, was a "radical defect," fatal to the appeal.
It is worth reiterating that this appeal named "the employee as the sole appellant." Could the employee's estate have a claim for past benefits? Certainly. But, in that instance, the estate would have to exist and that estate would have to be the party filing the appeal (or at least be one of them). To do so, the estate would act through an agent, such as an executor or an attorney. The estate would contract for such representation, not the deceased person.
It is worth reiterating that this appeal named "the employee as the sole appellant." Could the employee's estate have a claim for past benefits? Certainly. But, in that instance, the estate would have to exist and that estate would have to be the party filing the appeal (or at least be one of them). To do so, the estate would act through an agent, such as an executor or an attorney. The estate would contract for such representation, not the deceased person.
Reading the case, I was reminded of a situation years ago in which an accident occurred that resulted in persistent loss of consciousness and hospitalization. Medical professionals encounter those circumstances periodically, a patient that cannot interact or provide information. And, the patient cannot enter a contract with a lawyer to represent the patient's interests. In that setting, it is common for family to step into the void and provide information and history for the medical professionals.
The family member(s) might similarly retain an attorney. But, can that attorney represent the interests of the patient, without the patient's consent and agreement? Or, is the attorney limited to advising the family member(s) that formed that contract of representation? In the case of the unconscious patient I recall, there was no family member. The patient was an adult male who lacked parents, siblings, or children. The only person presenting at the hospital was a girlfriend. Fortunately for the patient, a girlfriend with extensive knowledge of the patient's family medical history and past complaints/care. But, unfortunately, not a family member.
But, despite being able to provide medical information for the patient, the girlfriend was not legally able to consent or object to care. She could not hire an attorney to represent the injured worker in seeking care or other workers' compensation benefits. An attorney, to represent a person, must have a contract with the person. Certainly, in such a situation a Court could grant the girlfriend or other person the authority of guardian. As a guardian, the girlfriend or other person might then make decisions, pursue benefits on the patient's behalf, or otherwise act. However, the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims is not a Court and could not grant such authority to a person to act as guardian. Such a situation can thus be complicated.
But, despite being able to provide medical information for the patient, the girlfriend was not legally able to consent or object to care. She could not hire an attorney to represent the injured worker in seeking care or other workers' compensation benefits. An attorney, to represent a person, must have a contract with the person. Certainly, in such a situation a Court could grant the girlfriend or other person the authority of guardian. As a guardian, the girlfriend or other person might then make decisions, pursue benefits on the patient's behalf, or otherwise act. However, the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims is not a Court and could not grant such authority to a person to act as guardian. Such a situation can thus be complicated.
In the Alabama example, the immediate question involves the survival of benefits and entitlement after death. If benefit entitlement continues following death, it is possible that a "personal representative" could continue to seek those benefits on behalf of the estate of the deceased worker. In that setting, the live representative pursues the relief on behalf of the deceased, and essentially her or his heirs. The "party" to the case, the lawyer's "client" is the representative, not the deceased employee.
Additionally, there is the potential that other living people may have the right to pursue benefits, despite the employee's death. If children, spouse, or others are afforded individual rights to benefits under a state's workers' compensation law (death or survivor benefits), those living relatives might well be allowed to pursue those benefits despite the worker's death.
However, those individuals, or "parties," would only be represented by the attorney for the worker if those parties formed their own contract(s) with that attorney. The attorney's authority to represent the worker stems from the contract between them. That authority does not ipso facto grant the attorney authority to represent other parties such as spouse or children survivors. Those parties are free to hire their own attorney(s).
The lesson, in the end, is that death is final. It terminates the ability to proceed with litigation, enter contracts, and more. When a client dies, it is incumbent upon the attorney to consider whether the estate can and should proceed. But before proceeding, it is incumbent on the attorney to contract legally to do so, with the estate, executor, etc. Similarly, if a person is incapacitated, she or he cannot contract with an attorney or otherwise. An attorney acting at the behest of a family member or others (girlfriend) must be granted authority to act. That means some official designation of authority by a competent court or other authority. While that is complex and potentially expensive, it is the only way forward.
This adds a layer to an already difficult time. Death of a loved one is never easy and often life-changing. In that emotional time, following the letter of the law, observing technicalities, and maintaining formalities will be difficult. However, failure to do so may end in a dismissal of legal proceedings as described in this Alabama case. Such dismissal may be to the detriment of both the worker and her/his family and survivors. Failure to follow technicalities may lead to disappointment and even recrimination.
However, those individuals, or "parties," would only be represented by the attorney for the worker if those parties formed their own contract(s) with that attorney. The attorney's authority to represent the worker stems from the contract between them. That authority does not ipso facto grant the attorney authority to represent other parties such as spouse or children survivors. Those parties are free to hire their own attorney(s).
The lesson, in the end, is that death is final. It terminates the ability to proceed with litigation, enter contracts, and more. When a client dies, it is incumbent upon the attorney to consider whether the estate can and should proceed. But before proceeding, it is incumbent on the attorney to contract legally to do so, with the estate, executor, etc. Similarly, if a person is incapacitated, she or he cannot contract with an attorney or otherwise. An attorney acting at the behest of a family member or others (girlfriend) must be granted authority to act. That means some official designation of authority by a competent court or other authority. While that is complex and potentially expensive, it is the only way forward.
This adds a layer to an already difficult time. Death of a loved one is never easy and often life-changing. In that emotional time, following the letter of the law, observing technicalities, and maintaining formalities will be difficult. However, failure to do so may end in a dismissal of legal proceedings as described in this Alabama case. Such dismissal may be to the detriment of both the worker and her/his family and survivors. Failure to follow technicalities may lead to disappointment and even recrimination.
