Minnesota high court to hear debate on cameras in courtroom
Legal Events
The Minnesota Supreme Court will arguments on whether to permanently allow cameras in the courtroom, following trials by ex-police officers Derek Chauvin and Kim Potter that were watched by millions of people around the world.
An advisory committee made up of Minnesota judges, attorneys and court personnel is recommending the court continue its routine of keeping out cameras. Minnesota media outlets and advocacy groups say it’s time the state embrace the technology like neighboring Iowa, Wisconsin and North Dakota.
Minnesota’s top court is scheduled to hear arguments on the issue Tuesday.
Presiding Hennepin County District Court judges were initially opposed to cameras in the courtroom for the notorious trials of Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd, and Potter for the killing of Daunte Wright. Both judges, Peter Cahill and Regina Chu, changed their minds in part because of immense public interest and COVID-19 limitations.
Media and government organizations, along with Cahill, sent letters to the Supreme Court in support of expanded camera access. Victims’ rights groups, public defenders, defense attorneys and prosecutors are opposed, the Star Tribune reported.
“The fact of the matter is that these are incredibly emotional times, difficult times for all the parties that are involved,” said Minnesota State Public Defender Bill Ward. “Justice should not be a spectator sport and should not be something that’s sensationalized in the news media.”
Mankato Free Press Managing Editor Joe Spear wrote to the court that the presence of a camera doesn’t change the truth.
Related listings
-
Appellate court rules against mine company’s Arizona project
Legal Events 05/10/2022Minerals Inc.’s plan for a new open-pit copper mine in southeastern Arizona.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the U.S. Forest Service’s approval of a permit for the Rosemont Mine project in a valley on the eastern flank of...
-
Wisconsin Supreme Court adopts GOP-drawn legislative maps
Legal Events 04/20/2022The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday adopted Republican-drawn maps for the state Legislature, handing the GOP a victory just weeks after initially approving maps drawn by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.The court reversed itself after the U.S. Supreme Co...
-
Wisconsin Supreme Court adopts GOP-drawn legislative maps
Legal Events 04/17/2022The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday adopted Republican-drawn maps for the state Legislature, handing the GOP a victory just weeks after initially approving maps drawn by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.The court reversed itself after the U.S. Supreme Co...
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.