Supreme Court won’t take case prompted by Flint water crisis
Legal Events
The Supreme Court has declined to take a case stemming from the 2014 water crisis in Flint, Michigan.
Approximately 25,000 people have sued over the crisis, in which a change in the source of the city’s water resulted in lead contamination.
The case the justices turned away without comment Tuesday involves a lawsuit against the city and water regulators, most of whom were responsible for making sure federal clean water laws were followed. The lawsuit claims the officials failed to protect residents from a foreseeable risk of harm from exposure to lead. The lawsuit and others like it claim that the public has a constitutional right to “bodily integrity” that was violated.
The city and officials have argued they should be immune from being sued, but lower courts have disagreed. The lawsuit and others like it are expected to go forward in lower courts.
Related listings
-
Saudis sentence 5 people to death for Khashoggi’s killing
Legal Events 12/21/2019A court in Saudi Arabia sentenced five people to death Monday for the killing of Washington Post columnist and royal family critic Jamal Khashoggi, whose grisly slaying in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul drew international condemnation and cast a clo...
-
Protests of Indian law grow despite efforts to contain them
Legal Events 12/17/2019From campuses along India’s Himalayan northern border to its southern Malabar Coast, a student-led protest movement against a new law that grants citizenship on the basis of religion spread nationwide on Wednesday despite efforts by the governm...
-
Trump Has Successfully Gamed the Courts
Legal Events 12/11/2019At its simplest level, the impeachment of President Donald Trump looks like a collision between the legislative and executive branches of government. In that fight, each side is trying to defend its prerogatives as it sees them: For Congress (or at l...
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.