All owners of residential and commercial property in Allegheny County will soon receive an initial, informal revaluation from Sabre Systems and Services, Inc. Sabre is the private contractor hired by Allegheny to conduct the revaluation. The Preliminary Notice of Market Value is not the final assessment and is not being issued by the County. Rather, it is an notice of what Sabre intends to recommend to the County. Property owners will begin receiving a Preliminary Notice of Market Value for their property in August 2000. During the ensuing informal review period, owners who disagree with the market value placed on their property have several options for seeking a change. After this informal review period is complete, the Allegheny County Board of Property Assessment, Appeals, and Review will mail a final change of assessment notice to each property owner.
All property owners will see higher valuations simply because the County is moving from a 25% valuation to a 100% valuation. For example, previously, a home valued at $100,000 would have been assessed at $25,000. Now, Allegheny County is making the assessed value equal to the market value so that a home with a market value of $100,000 also will have an assessed value of $100,000. Local taxing authorities are required to reduce their millage rates to account for the shift from 25% to 100% assessments and the new value determinations. Taxing authorities are required to adjust millage so that the annual revenues obtained from the new values do not exceed the prior year's tax revenues by more than 5%. (In other words, this does not mean that millage rates will be divided by 4.)
If you have access to the Internet, you can check the information used by Sabre in determining your property's value. Your Preliminary Notice of Market Value will contain an "E-Code" that allows you to view information about your property only and view other properties that were used in determining your new assessment. Since this value is preliminary, only the property owner, by using his or her personal "E-Code," will have access to information about his or her property at this time. It is yet to be determined if all property information will be made available to the general public on the Internet once the assessments are final in January 2001. Access to on-line detailed information on comparable properties, which is useful in making a challenge, may require payment of a research fee. However, comparable property information remains freely available through the traditional sources such as newspapers, libraries and at County Offices.
In January, 2001, The County Board of Assessment Appeals will issue the formal assessment notices. You will have 30 days to appeal the formal assessment. In presenting your appeal, although you are not required to obtain your own appraisal, many will do so. A professional appraiser will be able to assemble comparable property data and prepare other pertinent information which could improve your chances of success.
For additional information, visit the Official Allegheny County Website has useful information, including a link to Sabre's Revaluation Website.
The Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act takes away from employees their right to sue their employers for injuries they suffer in the course and scope of their employment. The loss of the right to sue is balanced by the strict liability that the Act imposes on employers. With few exceptions, when employees are injured while working, they are automatically entitled to medical and income benefits structured in the Act. The injured employee need not prove that the employer was negligent, and any negligence or fault on the employee's part does not reduce or eliminate the employee's entitlement to benefits.
Sometimes the courts struggle to determine whether an employee was actually in the course and scope of employment when the injury occurred. In a recent case, a management-level employee of a university sought workers' compensation benefits for the permanent loss of the use of an eye. The employee was attending a meeting in a conference room when he felt a sneeze coming on. Not wanting to offend others or spread germs, the employee tried to suppress the sneeze but failed, sneezing violently. He later described experiencing a sensation like a rubber band snapping onto his left eye following the sneeze. He was diagnosed with a detached retina and two retinal tears. Subsequent surgery repaired the damage but left the employee's vision impaired and his eye vulnerable to future deterioration.
The employer opposed any award of benefits, claiming that the employee was not obliged to avoid sneezing and that his attempt to avoid the sneeze was not caused by any workplace conditions. The court rejected the employer's arguments and confirmed that an employee's "working" includes ordinary down-time as well as activity at the workplace not directly involving assigned work. As long as an employee has not "abandoned" his duties and as long as his activity is not totally "foreign" to the employer's needs and objectives, the employee is entitled to benefits if injured.
Not all workplace injuries are compensable. A retail store employee witnessed a violent stabbing of a co-worker and suffered from recurrent nightmares and anxiety and stress disorders. She was denied any benefits even though she was actually eating lunch in a restaurant operated by the employer when the assault occurred. Because she was not required to eat on the premises, the court found that she was not acting in the course and scope of her employment.
Finally, employees can lose their entitlement to benefits if their conduct amounts to a violation of the employer's work rules. In a recent case, employees at a manufacturing plant argued and bumped into each other while operating forklift trucks. The court denied the injured employee any benefits because the rules posted in the workplace forbade employees from leaving their assigned work areas, from arguing, and from engaging in any horseplay. Because the employer proved that the claimant employee was outside his assigned area and was talking with others about eating hot chicken wings at the time that the argument started, the court found that he was in violation of several clear workplace rules and forfeited any benefits.
Employees injured in the course and scope of work activities should take prompt steps to
document the circumstances of their injuries. Employers should be equally concerned with
memorializing the facts and circumstances of workplace injuries. The posting of specific rules
prohibiting unwanted conduct can protect an employer from liability for workers' compensation
benefits.
When couples divorce, the courts order a distribution of all marital property unless the parties can agree on a distribution. But what happens if one spouse dies before the divorce is final and a distribution has not yet been ordered or agreed upon? The death of one spouse ends the divorce proceedings. The court cannot order a distribution, nor can the court issue a divorce decree. The surviving spouse becomes the sole owner of the marital estate, even if the decedent has bequeathed certain property in his or her will to other individuals.
Some property owned by married people is not marital property, such as some separate bank accounts, separately acquired real estate, and nonmarital personal property. A spouse's nonmarital property does not automatically pass to the surviving spouse if a properly prepared will directs such property to other beneficiaries. However, when a married person directs his or her separate property to others in a will, the surviving spouse may "elect to take against the will" and may be entitled to a one-third "forced share" of all nonmarital property. Life insurance proceeds are not included in this property, nor are pension or disability death benefits.
This spousal entitlement to inherit in the absence of a will is limited. If a surviving spouse "willfully and maliciously" deserts the deceased spouse for at least one year or neglects to support the deceased spouse for at least one year, he or she forfeits the right to inherit or to take against the will.
In a recent Pennsylvania case, a husband who was ordered out of his home in a Protection from Abuse proceeding later tried to take a forced share from his wife's estate after her death. The husband filed for divorce shortly after the court excluded him from the marital home. Five years passed and the couple remained separated but did not finalize their divorce. During the couple's separation, the wife executed a will that left all of her separate property to the couple's four adult children. The court found that even though the husband was ordered by the court to leave the home due to his propensity for violence, the husband's conduct amounted to a willful and malicious desertion.
It is unlikely that a court will find a "willful and malicious" desertion by either party if the couple's separation is by mutual agreement. However, where violent conduct leads to a court-ordered ouster of one spouse from the home, the court may find that a willful and malicious desertion has occurred.
Separated couples should consider reviewing their estate plans both during separation and after
the issuance of the divorce decree. The existence of any nonmarital property requires prudent
planning. Carefully memorializing the facts that gave rise to the separation can help to protect a
deceased spouse's estate against the surviving spouse's challenge to take against the will.
Can your automobile insurance company raise your premium? Can the company cancel your coverage?
Pennsylvania law provides some protection against premium increases and policy cancellations. A premium can be increased if a vehicle owner or another insured person in his or her household is involved in an accident and is at fault for the accident. The insurance company can also raise the premium if an individual is convicted of certain moving traffic offenses, such as speeding, failing to stop for a traffic light, or failing to obey a stop sign. However, an insurance company may not increase a policyholder's premium just because a claim is made against the insured policyholder by another driver, a passenger, or a pedestrian.
If the driver is not at fault, the insurance company cannot use the accident as a reason to raise the premium. While the law permits an insurance company some leeway in deciding whether the policyholder was at fault, there are certain kinds of accidents that give rise to the presumption that the insured was not at fault. Such types of accidents include accidents where a parked vehicle is struck, accidents where a vehicle is struck from behind and the owner is not cited for a motor vehicle violation, accidents where only the other driver is convicted of a moving violation, accidents in which the vehicle owner is struck by a hit-and-run vehicle, accidents in which money compensation is recovered from the other driver, and accidents involving a collision with an animal.
When an insurance company increases a premium due to at-fault accidents or moving violation convictions, it must provide the insured with a detailed summary of how the premium increase was calculated and how long it will be imposed. An insurance company can cancel the insured's policy if the premiums are not paid or if the insured's driver's license or vehicle registration is suspended or revoked. Cancellation by the company is also justified by an insured's conviction for more than two moving traffic violations or for certain accidents in which the insured is at fault.
An insurance company may cancel a policy if the company discovers that false statements were made on the policy application or on any subsequent questionnaires. Failing to disclose a speeding ticket or a physical disability can lead to cancellation if the company discovers such an omission. However, an insured's innocent omission on an application or a questionnaire is not enough to support policy cancellation. The company must prove that the insured knew he or she was acting dishonestly and that the misrepresentation relates to an issue the company regularly considers when deciding whether to issue or renew a policy of insurance.
The law specifically prohibits insurance companies from canceling an insurance policy based on age, residence in a certain community, race, sex, or marital status. If a husband and wife are insured on the same policy, facts that justify canceling because of the conduct of one spouse do not entitle the company to cancel the entire policy. Instead, the company may cancel the coverage only for the spouse in question.
The insurance laws and administrative regulations are complex and provide procedures by which
premium increases, cancellations, and refusals to renew can be challenged by insureds. Before
considering any such challenge, the insured should secure and review all available information
that the insurance company claims supports its decision.
Employees have a legal right to inspect and copy their personnel files. Pennsylvania law provides that any employee may inspect "his or her own personnel files used to determine his or her own qualifications for employment, promotion, additional compensation, termination or disciplinary action." The employer may require that the employee's request be made in writing and also may require that the inspection be made on the employee's free time.
The right to examine personnel files basically ends when an employee is terminated. Employees
who wish to examine their personnel files must make their request before or in the course of their
termination from employment or "within a reasonable time immediately following termination."
The Pennsylvania School Code mandates that all children attend school or pursue a course of home study. While most children begin school well before the age of eight, the law does not compel education until a child is eight years old. Once parents elect to enroll their child in school or to commence home study, the child is required to continuously attend until he or she graduates or turns 17.
Children can be excused from compulsory education before graduation if they are 16 years old and employed on a full-time basis. Fifteen-year-old children who have completed elementary school may drop out to pursue farm work or service in a private home if the school district issues a permit authorizing them to do so. Permits even may be issued to 14-year-old children who have completed elementary school. Pupils who have not graduated from high school are entitled to attend public school until they are 21.
A mixture of state and local revenues provides the funding for Pennsylvania school districts. Given the differences in tax revenue from one locality to another, school districts range from the wealthy to the poor. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled that children can have more than one residence. This decision gives parents and children greater flexibility to choose a preferred school district.
The court stated that if a child relocates from the marital home with one parent to reside in an
apartment, the child is entitled to attend school in the district where the apartment is located. The
continued presence of the other parent in the marital home does not establish the marital home as
the child's residence. The court noted that adults and children can have more than one residence
if they regularly stay in more than one home.
Since 1990, Pennsylvania law has permitted a limited "occupational" driver's license for certain drivers whose driving licenses have been suspended. The limited license can be used only to drive to and from work or school. One car is designated on the limited license and it is the only car the driver may operate.
Drivers are not eligible for the limited driver's license if they are under suspension in connection with driving under the influence, racing on highways, fleeing or eluding police, driving without lights to avoid identification, reckless driving, and numerous other serious moving violations. Also ineligible for the limited driver's license are any drivers who have had a limited license within five years or who have failed to take a required examination, failed to respond to a citation, or failed to maintain proper automobile insurance.
The limited occupational license is issued by the Department of Transportation. Drivers seeking the license must complete specific forms. If the department denies a driver's application, the applicant is entitled to a hearing. While it is difficult to procure a limited license and most suspended drivers are likely to be ineligible, the limited license is of great value to those who otherwise would be prohibited from driving at all.