PHILADELPHIA – A trio of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit agreed with a lower federal court that an injured, part-time police officer filed suit for denial of her medical benefits too quickly, before the benefits themselves were officially denied.
On Sept. 30, Third Circuit judges Thomas L. Ambro, Cheryl Ann Krause and Stephanos Bibas ruled to uphold a dismissal decision from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, in favor of the Borough of Moosic and its Mayor James Segilia, and against plaintiff Heather Bird.
Bird, a part-time police officer for the Borough, was injured on the job and applied for medical benefits under Pennsylvania’s Heart and Lung Act, 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 637. However, Mayor Segilia rejected her application without notice or a hearing.
“Bird sued under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, claiming that the Borough had deprived her of due process. Two days later, the Borough appointed a hearing officer and scheduled a hearing. The officer decided that because Bird was a part-time employee, she was not eligible for benefits,” Bibas said.
“The Borough Council never considered or formally adopted that decision. When the District Court discovered that the Council had not yet closed her case, it dismissed her suit as unripe. Now, Bird appeals.”
Though Bird argued that the District Court erred in raising ripeness on its own, Bibas pointed out that “federal courts cannot exercise jurisdiction before there is a ‘real, substantial controversy between [the] parties,’ and that “courts have a duty to raise ripeness issues even when the parties do not.”
“Federal litigants must wait for their disputes to ripen. Sue too soon, and a controversy may be speculative or premature,” Bibas stated.
Finding that the case was not ripe for disposition, the Third Circuit collectively ruled to uphold the lower court’s decision and dismiss the case’s appeal.
“Administrative action is generally unripe until it is final. The finality of the Borough’s administrative action is governed by the Pennsylvania Borough Code, which says that administrative authority may be delegated ‘if authority for the action was previously given or if the action is subsequently ratified’ by the Borough Council,” Bibas concluded.
“The Moosic Council apparently ratifies decisions by its hearing officers. Because the Council has not done that here, Bird’s case is not ripe, and the District Court lacked jurisdiction. We will thus affirm the District Court’s dismissal.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit case 21-1326
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 3:20-cv-00337
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com