Lawyer loses challenge to mandatory membership in group
Legal Events
A federal appeals court has rejected a challenge to a policy that requires lawyers join the State Bar of Michigan. Lucille Taylor said the group’s use of her dues for advocacy activities violates her right to free speech, among other objections. But the appeals court, 3-0, said the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that mandatory membership as a condition of practicing law doesn’t violate freedom of association. The Supreme Court said in another case that bar associations can use dues without violating free speech. Taylor was chief counsel under Gov. John Engler and a top Republican lawyer in the Legislature. She argued that a 2018 decision in favor of public employees who don’t want to join a union would help her. “The speech claim would prevail if an integrated bar association used mandatory membership fees to fund non-germane political or ideological activity without providing adequate opt-out procedures,” Judge Amul Thapar said Thursday. Taylor conceded that the State Bar of Michigan’s activities don’t cross that line, Thapar said.
| New York Dental Malpractice Attorney DUI Lawyer dentalmalpracticenewyork.com |
Related listings
-
Nepal’s Supreme Court reinstates dissolved lower house
Legal Events 07/12/2021Nepal’s Supreme Court reinstated the House of Representatives on Monday and upheld the leader of the opposition’s claim to be the new prime minister. The 167-page court order removes Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli, who had been running ...
-
High court sides with ex-athletes in NCAA compensation case
Legal Events 06/21/2021The Supreme Court decided unanimously Monday that the NCAA can’t enforce rules limiting education-related benefits — like computers and paid internships — that colleges offer to student athletes. The case doesn’t decide whethe...
-
Justices consider Harvard case on race in college admissions
Legal Events 06/14/2021With abortion and guns already on the agenda, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court is considering adding a third blockbuster issue — whether to ban consideration of race in college admissions. The justices could say as soon as Monday whethe...
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.