Tasered Woman Wins Trial In Suit Against Cops
National News
According to Courthouse News, Minnesota police illegally Tasered a woman for refusing to hang up her 911 call after officers handcuffed her husband during a traffic stop, the 8th Circuit ruled.
Sandra Brown and her husband, Richard, were driving home from dinner in downtown Minneapolis when they were pulled over by a Golden Valley squad car. One of the officers asked Richard if he knew why he'd been stopped, and Richard replied that he did not.
What happened after involved what Sandra, the passenger, thought to be excessive aggression, so she called 911.
Backup officer Rob Zarrett ordered Sandra to "Get off the phone." When she refused, he Tasered her. He claimed the action was necessary, because Sandra had disobeyed his orders to unfasten her seatbelt. He also spotted two empty cocktail glasses on the floors, in violation of the state's open-container law.
Sandra sued Zarrett and the city of Golden Valley for use of excessive force, claiming she was physically and psychologically injured by the Tasering.
"Given the circumstances surrounding the Tasering and arrest, we are not convinced that Zarrett's use of force was objectively reasonable as a matter of law," the St. Louis-based appeals court ruled.
Judge Wollman pointed out that Sandra had not been trying to flee or resist arrest when she was Tasered.
Related listings
-
Prop 8 To be Decided on Soon
National News 06/17/2009Gov. 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 o...
-
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...
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.