Court affirms overturning Fla. gay adoption ban
Headline Legal News
Florida's strict ban on adoption by gay people is unconstitutional because no other group, even people with criminal backgrounds, are singled out for a flat prohibition by state law, an appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The ruling by the 3rd District Court of Appeal upholds a 2008 decision by a Miami-Dade County judge who found "no rational basis" for the ban when she approved the adoption of two young brothers by Martin Gill and his male partner. The prohibition was first enacted in 1977 and is the only law of its kind in the nation, according to court records.
In a 28-page opinion, a three-judge panel of the court noted that gay people are permitted to become foster parents or legal guardians in Florida, yet are the only group not allowed to adopt.
"It is difficult to see any rational basis in utilizing homosexual persons as foster parents or guardians on a temporary or permanent basis, while imposing a blanket prohibition on those same persons," wrote Judge Gerald Cope for the panel. "All other persons are eligible to be considered case-by-case to be adoptive parents."
The decision is likely to be appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, which could then determine the ultimate fate of the law. "We note that our ruling is unlikely to be the last word," the appeals panel said.
The ruling came in an appeal of the 2008 decision by the state Department of Children & Families, which had urged the judges to consider evidence of what it said were risk factors among potential gay parents. These factors, according to attorneys for the department, included more sexual activity by children of gay parents and more incidents of teasing and bullying suffered by children from gay households.
Related listings
-
American Bar Association Honors Philadelphia Firms
Headline Legal News 09/22/2010The American Bar Association’s Death Penalty Representation Project will acknowledge Philadelphia law firms Reed Smith LLP and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP’s role in ground-breaking, pro bono litigation of capital punishment appeals with an Excepti...
-
Man who tried to fake death pleads guilty to fraud
Headline Legal News 09/16/2010An Indiana money manager who once led a high-flying lifestyle pleaded guilty to five securities fraud counts on Wednesday, nearly two years after he tried to fake his death in a Florida plane crash to escape the crush of financial and personal proble...
-
Court lets part of organic-milk case proceed
Headline Legal News 09/16/2010A federal appeals court says a group of dairy consumers can proceed with parts of a lawsuit alleging that several national retailers and an organic dairy company falsely labeled the dairy's milk.Aurora Organic Dairy, based in Boulder, Colo., is the n...
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.