Kansas workers seek to bar immigration questions
Headline Legal News
Workers who filed a class-action lawsuit against a Kansas slaughterhouse for unpaid wages and overtime have asked a federal judge to bar Creekstone Farms Premium Beef from discovering their immigration status during the litigation.
The employees have asked U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren for a protective order prohibiting the Arkansas City meatpacker from receiving from the named plaintiffs — or any other workers who opt into the lawsuit — any information pertaining to their present names or any other names they may have used.
They also seek to avoid having to disclose their place of birth, Social Security number and any present or prior addresses. The plaintiff's motion also seeks an order protecting the workers from having to turn over to Creekstone Farms any tax returns or any other tax forms filed under any of their identities or having to disclose the dates and times of entry into the United States. They also want to avoid turning over all identification documents likely to lead to the discovery of their immigration status.
Their attorney, Mark Kistler, told The Associated Press Tuesday that the courts already have decided that these types of information which could lead to discovery of immigration status should be protected from discovery during a lawsuit.
Related listings
-
DeMocker defense says former lawyer will keep mum
Headline Legal News 08/01/2011Lawyers for a Prescott stockbroker facing a murder retrial say they won't allow his former defense attorney to give a deposition in the case. John Sears is one of two attorneys who quit Steven DeMocker's case in October, citing a conflict of interest...
-
Court reverses conviction on online Obama threat
Headline Legal News 07/20/2011A federal appeals court on Tuesday overturned the conviction of a man who posted Internet messages threatening Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign. A divided three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Walter ...
-
Fresno DA charges woman after deadly bus crash
Headline Legal News 07/20/2011A woman accused of providing alcohol to a teenage driver who caused a deadly Greyhound bus crash has been charged with a misdemeanor, officials said Tuesday. Michelle Kay Cole, 22, was charged with purchasing an alcoholic beverage for a person under ...
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.