Supreme Court sides with Ohio over death row inmate
U.S. Court News
The Supreme Court is ordering a federal appeals court to re-examine the case of a convicted killer in Ohio whose death sentence was thrown out after he was found to be mentally disabled.
In an unsigned opinion Monday, the justices said that the federal appeals court in Cincinnati applied the wrong standard when it concluded that inmate Danny Hill was ineligible to be executed.
The high court said the appellate judges wrongly relied on a recent Supreme Court decision, but should have instead based their decision on rulings that were in effect at the time that state courts judged Hill not to be mentally disabled.
The Supreme Court banned the execution of mentally disabled people in 2002, but states still retain significant discretion in assessing mental disability.
Related listings
-
Chief justice details efforts to combat workplace misconduct
U.S. Court News 01/01/2019Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is using his annual report on the federal judiciary to highlight the steps the branch has taken to combat inappropriate conduct in the workplace.In December 2017, Roberts asked that a working group be put toge...
-
Court extends detention for Nissan ex-chair Ghosn by 10 days
U.S. Court News 12/29/2018Former Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn will be detained at least through Jan. 11, the Tokyo District Court said Monday, as the once revered auto industry figure faces allegations that have marked a stunning downfall.Ghosn, who led Nissan Motor Co. for t...
-
Supreme Court rejects Trump plea to enforce asylum ban
U.S. Court News 12/22/2018A divided Supreme Court won’t let the Trump administration begin enforcing a ban on asylum for any immigrants who illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border. Chief Justice John Roberts joined his four more liberal colleagues Friday in ruling agains...
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.