DeSantis court pick improper, but high court won't undo

National Legal News

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis exceeded his authority by appointing a constitutionally ineligible person to the Florida Supreme Court, but the high court said in a ruling Thursday that it won't undo the appointment.

State Rep. Geraldine Thompson asked the court to invalidate the appointment of Judge Renatha Francis because the state constitution requires Supreme Court appointees to have served as a member of the Florida Bar for at least 10 years.

The Supreme Court said Thompson is right that Francis was ineligible for the appointment, but said she asked the court for a remedy that was not legally available, and that it would not undo the appointment on its own.

DeSantis appointed Francis on May 26, but said at the time she would not take office until Sept. 24 when she will have been a member of the Florida Bar for 10 years. The Supreme Court said that's not how appointments of justices work, and the governor is not able to appoint an ineligible justice and hold the position for a future date.

The governor chooses appointees from a list provided to him by the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission. Thompson asked the Supreme Court to invalidate Francis's appointment, throw out the list provided by the commission and force the governor to pick an eligible appointee from the new list.

But the court ruled that Thompson waited too long to challenge the list and that the proper remedy would be to have the governor immediately pick an appointee from the original list.

“It is not enough for the Petitioner to establish that the Governor exceeded his authority by appointing Judge Francis. To prevail in this action, the Petitioner also must have sought proper relief. This is where the Petitioner’s case fails,” the court wrote.

Thompson's office did not immediately reply to a phone message and emails seeking comment. DeSantis's office said it was preparing a written statement on the ruling.

If Francis takes her oath next month, she will be the first Caribbean-American to serve on the Florida court.

Related listings

  • Court drops rape, other charges against megachurch leader

    Court drops rape, other charges against megachurch leader

    National Legal News 04/07/2020

    A California appeals court ordered the dismissal of a criminal case Tuesday against a Mexican megachurch leader on charges of child rape and human trafficking on procedural grounds.Naason Joaquin Garcia, the self-proclaimed apostle of La Luz del Mund...

  • Texas court delays 2nd execution due to virus outbreak

    Texas court delays 2nd execution due to virus outbreak

    National Legal News 03/20/2020

    Texas’ highest criminal court on Thursday delayed the scheduled execution of a second death row inmate as the state tries to slow the spread of the coronavirus.The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered a 60-day delay of Tracy Beatty’s s...

  • Cross-examination drives key Weinstein accuser to tears

    Cross-examination drives key Weinstein accuser to tears

    National Legal News 02/02/2020

    A  key accuser in the New York City rape trial of Harvey Weinstein broke down in tears on the witness stand on Monday during an exhaustive cross-examination over the nature of her relationship with the once-powerful movie mogul.The drama, which ...

Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs

When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.

In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.

In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.