Photo credit: BigStock

A father who "had been largely absent" from his 4-year-old son's life is not entitled to wrongful death proceeds from a lawsuit stemming from the child's drowning.

A three-judge Pennsylvania Superior Court panel consisting of Judges Jack Panella, Deborah Kunselman and John Musmanno upheld a Philadelphia court's decision that Carl Griggs forfeited his share of the money from a lawsuit filed by the child's mother, Janelle Johnson.

At the time of 4-year-old Nahyer Johnson's drowning in Neshaminy Creek, Griggs was incarcerated and prior to that was "not involved at all during the first year of child's life," Kunselman wrote in the court's Aug. 20 opinion. "Father only saw child once, when mother brought child to visit father in prison. In fact, child thought his maternal grandfather was his dad."

Following Janelle Johnson's filing of the lawsuit, she submitted a petition for forfeiture of Griggs' share of the wrongful death proceeds. According to Kunselman's opinion, an evidentiary hearing was held with the child's grandfather and a day care worker testifying "about the relationship, or the lack thereof," between Griggs and his son. The court granted the petition.

On appeal, Griggs argued that the trial court erred in determining he failed to support his son and misinterpreted the law regarding forfeiture.

Griggs argued that he did not willfully fail to support his child, as was a requirement for forfeiture in previous iterations of the law. However, Kunselman said the law has since changed.

"In the current iteration of the statute, where 'willfully neglected' has been removed, a parent forfeits his interest when, inter alia, he simply 'failed to perform the duty to support,'" Kunselman said. "The reason for the failure is irrelevant."

Griggs also argued that he had no duty to support the child because his monthly Social Security disability income of $700 was suspended when he was incarcerated.

"Even if incarceration did alleviate him from providing financial support, father still could have provided some form of emotional or physical support," Kunselman said. "No doubt, the degree to which he could perform the duty would have been hampered. But the record is nevertheless devoid of allegations that mother thwarted father's attempts to have a relationship with child while incarcerated."

Kunselman added, "Father corresponded with mother while incarcerated, but he never communicated with child. Father explains that mother brought child to visit him only once during the incarceration. We can infer that this was enough for father, who did not petition for more contact, as other prisoners have done."

Joseph Rutala of the Bahuriak Law Group represents Griggs and Robert Beck Jr. of Archer represents Johnson. Neither responded to requests for comment.