King Yaklin Wins $1M in Attorney's Fee's
Notable Attorneys
A Superior Court judge has ordered a couple and their attorney suingBishop Earl Paulk to pay more than $1 million in legal fees and courtcosts from a dismissed case.
Mona and Bobby Brewer sued Paulk and his church, then known as ChapelHill Harvester Church in Decatur, asserting sexual misconduct. MonaBrewer claimed in the suit she had a 14-year coercive affair with Paulk.
The Brewers dropped their years-old suit last July, but each filed a separate suit in state court later in the year.
The judge entered the order last Friday for costs incurred by threedifferent legal firms who defended Paulk in the Superior Court case.
Matthew Wilkins of King & Yaklin, one of Paulk's firms, said they are still reviewing the order and had no comment.
Louis Levenson of Levenson & Associates, the Brewer's attorney,said he has not seen the order. Levenson and the Brewers were orderedto pay the fees.
Paulk was one of Atlanta's preeminent preachers in the 1980s and 1990s.He had a church of 10,000 and an international ministry and TV program.A series of allegations of sexual misconduct plagued his work, and Paullost influence and his ministry.
He still goes to the church, now called the Cathedral at Chapel Hill,but has dropped from public sight. Attendance on the mammoth campus hasdropped dramatically.
Related listings
-
San Bernardino, California Criminal Defense Lawyers
Notable Attorneys 07/19/2021At Bullard & Powell, we believe that every criminal case, just like the person being charged, is unique. To that end, we do not view our cases as simply files to be worked on, but view them from the perspective of our clients. We work closely wit...
-
Michigan court blocks 2-week absentee ballot extension
Notable Attorneys 10/18/2020Absentee ballots must arrive by Election Day to be counted, the Michigan Court of Appeals said Friday, blocking a 14-day extension that had been ordered by a lower court and embraced by key Democratic officials in a battleground state. Any changes mu...
-
Shooting outside US court in Phoenix wounds federal officer
Notable Attorneys 09/16/2020A drive-by shooting wounded a federal security officer outside the U.S. courthouse in downtown Phoenix on Tuesday, and a person was later taken into custody, authorities said. The officer was taken to a hospital and was expected to recover, according...
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.