Washington high court to hear charter school case
Headline Legal News
The Washington Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether the state's voter-approved charter school law violates the state constitution.
Oral arguments concerning the lawsuit brought by charter school opponents have been scheduled for the afternoon of Oct. 28.
A King County Superior Court judge found in December that parts of the new law are unconstitutional. Judge Jean Rietschel's decision focused on whether certain taxpayer dollars can be used to pay for the operation of charter schools.
Both sides asked the Supreme Court to skip the appeals court process and directly review the case.
Attorney Paul Lawrence says the briefs to the court and the oral arguments will focus on that part of the lawsuit.
The state's charter school system was approved by voters in 2012.
Related listings
-
Appeals court OKs permits for Upper Peninsula mine
Headline Legal News 08/13/2014The Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld a decision by state environmental regulators to allow construction of a nickel and copper mine in the Upper Peninsula. A three-judge panel unanimously sided with the Department of Environmental Quality, which ...
-
US Supreme Court lets Equifax tax ruling stand
Headline Legal News 07/01/2014The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won't hear an appeal from credit bureau Equifax Inc. involving what it considered an adverse tax ruling in Mississippi. The appeal was a reaction to a 2013 Mississippi Supreme Court decision that Equifax had...
-
Court rejects appeal of gay jury selection case
Headline Legal News 06/25/2014A federal appeals court on Tuesday refused to reconsider its ruling granting heightened legal protections to gays and lesbians, prompting three dissenting judges to warn of far-reaching implications in same-sex marriage cases in the Western United St...
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.