Court hearing gay marriage arguments from 4 states
National News
A federal appeals court was set to hear arguments Wednesday in six gay marriage fights from four states — Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee - in the biggest such session on the issue so far.
Three judges of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati will consider arguments that pit states' rights and traditional, conservative values against what plaintiffs' attorneys say is a fundamental right to marry under the U.S. Constitution. Large demonstrations are expected outside the courthouse by both opponents and supporters.
Michigan's and Kentucky's cases stem from rulings striking down each state's gay marriage bans. Ohio's case deals only with the state's recognition of out-of-state gay marriages, while Tennessee's is narrowly focused on the rights of three same-sex couples.
Attorneys on both sides in the Michigan and Ohio cases will go first and get a half-hour each to make their cases. Kentucky and Tennessee will follow, with 15 minutes for each side from both states.
A handful of people were at the courthouse Wednesday before it opened to reserve a seat in an overflow room for the hearing, including Frank Colasonti Jr., 61, of Birmingham, Michigan, who said he camped outside the building overnight.
Colasonti said he and his partner of 26 years married this year in Michigan, before a court order halted marriages pending the state's appeal.
Related listings
-
German court receives suit against EU bank union
National News 07/29/2014A group of German professors has filed a complaint to the country's highest court against the European Union's plans to create a so-called banking union, a central part of the effort to make the continent's financial system more resilient. The Federa...
-
Brown appoints legal affairs aide to appeals court
National News 07/29/2014Gov. Jerry Brown has named a senior aide to become an associate justice on the Sacramento-based Third District Court of Appeal. Brown announced the appointment of Jonathan Renner on Friday. The 44-year-old Democrat from Sacramento has been Brown's le...
-
Montana court sends wind farm clash to California
National News 07/22/2014A dispute over a Montana wind farm's potential to harm nearby nesting eagles and other birds should be heard in California, the Montana Supreme Court said Friday, in an opinion that deals a legal setback to the project's developers. The legal row ove...
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.