Kan. House debates forcing lawsuit over casino
National News
The Kansas House is debating whether it should force the attorney general to file a lawsuit over a proposed state-owned casino south of Wichita.
A resolution being discussed Thursday would require Attorney General Derek Schmidt to sue the state Racing and Gaming Commission's over its decision to allow a casino near Mulvane.
Iowa-based Peninsula Gaming plans to build a $260 million casino complex 18 miles south of Wichita.
Critics question whether the commission's decision in January was premature.
They cite misdemeanor campaign finance charges pending against the company and two top executives in Iowa. Company officials have said they're confident the case will be resolved in their favor, and they've started work on the casino.
Kansas law allows one legislative chamber to direct the attorney general to file a lawsuit.
Related listings
-
Treasury risks overpaying law firms
National News 04/18/2011The Treasury Department paid out more than $27 million to law firms overseeing the financial bailouts without requiring detailed bills or questioning the incomplete records that the lawyers provided, a government watchdog says. Treasury's "current co...
-
Court turns down appeal in murder plot case
National News 04/18/2011The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal in a murder-for-hire plot after the star prosecution witness forged documents used at trial and lied about his military background. The court said Monday it will not review a divided appeals court ruling that,...
-
Court ruling could mean NJ budget scramble
National News 04/10/2011Gov. Chris Christie is warning that if the state Supreme Court rules the way it usually does on a long-running school funding case, it could doom other state services. The build-up about the immediate consequences gives the chapter of the court case ...
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.