Calif Supreme Court says threats must be serious
National News
The California Supreme Court says state laws against threatening a crime victim or witness are valid only if a reasonable listener believes the threats are serious.
The San Francisco Chronicle says last week's unanimous decision means a Riverside County judge must re-examine the conviction of a man who told his jailed wife he would blow away the head of a man who accused them of stealing $250,000.
Eddie Lowery was convicted of threatening a crime victim and he was sentenced to a year in jail.
In its ruling Thursday, the court ruled a threat is not protected by freedom of speech if a reasonable listener concludes the speaker was serious and wasn't merely joking.
Related listings
-
Appeals court strikes health insurance requirement
National News 08/14/2011A federal appeals court panel on Friday struck down the requirement in President Barack Obama's health care overhaul package that virtually all Americans must carry health insurance or face penalties. The divided three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit...
-
Lawyer: NJ student didn't mean to spy on roommate
National News 08/11/2011A lawyer for a former Rutgers University student accused of using a webcam to spy on his roommate's intimate encounter with another man says in newly filed legal papers that prosecutors got it all wrong and that the case should be dropped. Nineteen-y...
-
Court rules firing of NJ casino dealer unlawful
National News 08/09/2011A federal appeals court has sided with an Atlantic City casino dealer who says he was targeted because he was involved in union organizing. Bally's Park Place fired Jose Justiniano in 2007. The casino claimed he misused family medical leave time by a...
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.