US appeals court upholds gun laws after Newtown massacre
Notable Attorneys
A federal appeals court has upheld key provisions of New York and Connecticut laws banning possession of semi-automatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday, finding that the core parts of the laws do not violate the Second Amendment.
The laws were passed after the December 2012 shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut killed 20 first-graders and six educators.
The three-judge panel did, however, agree with a lower court that a seven-round load limit in New York could not be imposed. And it found a Connecticut ban on a non-semi-automatic Remington 7615 unconstitutional.
The laws were opposed by groups supporting gun rights, pistol permit holders and gun sellers. Lawyers did not immediately return messages seeking comment.
Related listings
-
Court rejects ex-NY Fed employee's retaliation claim lawsuit
Notable Attorneys 09/23/2015A New York-based federal appeals court has rejected claims of a former employee of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York who says she was fired for her probe into the banking firm Goldman Sachs. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on We...
-
Court suspends Pennsylvania attorney general's law license
Notable Attorneys 09/22/2015Pennsylvania's highest court on Monday ordered the temporary suspension of state Attorney General Kathleen Kane's law license, a step that could trigger efforts to remove her from office as she fights perjury, obstruction and other charges. The unani...
-
Court documents quantify impact of gay marriage in Kansas
Notable Attorneys 09/20/2015Court documents are offering a glimpse at the early impact of the gay marriage ruling in Kansas. The latest filing Tuesday from state officials comes in the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Kansas ban on same-sex marriages. A federal ...
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.