The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments over whether a new damages trial is warranted in a logging accident case that produced $135,000 in survival damages for a victim's widow, but nothing for the wrongful death claim.

Allowance of appeal was granted by the justices on Oct. 22 in McMichael v. McMichael, but was not limited to the jury's decision not to award wrongful death damages.

The court agreed to examine the question:

"When there is no evidence of economic losses under the Wrongful Death Act, such as medical or funeral expenses, or estate administration costs; no evidence as to the amounts that the decedent would have provided to his family over his lifetime; and no evidence as to the value of the services that the decedent would have provided to his family; and the jury did not accept as credible evidence of the spouse's alleged non-economic loss, was the jury within its prerogative to award no damages under the Wrongful Death Act, was the trial court within its discretion in denying a new trial as to damages under that act, and did the Superior Court err in adopting a per se requirement of damages in virtually all wrongful death cases?"

Previously, the Superior Court rejected the trial judge's denial of a new damages trial in plaintiff Tina McMichael's case over the death of her husband, Seth, according to Superior Court Senior Judge Eugene Strassburger's opinion.

Seth McMichael was killed while clearing trees on his uncle's property to ready the area for the installation of a pipeline. Tina McMichael sued the uncle, Peter McMichael, and P&J Construction and Landscape Nursery LLC.

She alleged the defendants were liable for the 100-plus-pound tree limb that struck and killed Seth McMichael after one of the defendants' employees cut it down.

While she was awarded $135,000 for survival damages, Strassburger said the trial court's decision not to grant a new trial for wrongful death damages—based on the belief that she did not provide enough evidence of the financial loss her husband's death incurred—was incorrect.

"Despite wife's testimony, the jury awarded wife zero dollars in wrongful death damages. While wife did not present specific dollar amounts for the services decedent rendered to the  household, it unquestionably amounted to more than zero dollars," Strassburger said. "Instead of attempting to estimate the amount of these services, the jury completely disregarded the evidence presented on the question of wrongful death damages and settled on an inadequate amount of zero dollars. Therefore, we conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in denying wife's motion for a new trial as to wrongful death damages."

The defendants are represented by Thomas McGinnis of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer in Pittsburgh. Tina McMichael is represented by Andrew Rothey of Rosen Louik & Perry in Pittsburgh. Neither responded to requests for comment.