Prop 8 To be Decided on Soon
National News
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says a federal lawsuit challenging California's gay marriage ban poses a valid legal question that should be decided by the courts.
Schwarzenegger's position came in a court filing Tuesday in response to the lawsuit filed on behalf of two unmarried same-sex couples who want to overturn Proposition 8.
Heading the legal team for the couples are famed attorneys David Boies and Theodore Olson, who opposed each other in the 2000 presidential election challenge.
Last week, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, also named as a defendant, said in a court filing that he agrees Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection and due process.
Schwarzenegger didn't elaborate on the merits of the lawsuit, only saying that it "presents important constitutional questions."
Related listings
-
Some possible nominees had easy Senate path before
National News 05/24/2009Some of the people President Barack Obama is considering for the Supreme Court got significant support from Republicans when they were last before the Senate seeking jobs in the judiciary or executive branches of government. But a yes vote then doesn...
-
Calif. wants US Supreme Court OK of video game ban
National News 05/22/2009California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to reinstate a state law banning the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. In February, the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals str...
-
Key player in sports-bribery case appears in court
National News 05/15/2009Two former University of Toledo football players charged in a point-shaving scheme were arraigned in federal court Wednesday, including an ex-running back from Canada who is described as a key contact for Detroit-area gamblers. Not guilty pleas were ...
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.