Court blames LA County for ocean pollution
Recent Cases
A California appeals court has sided with environmentalists in a decision that blames Los Angeles County and its flood control district for sending polluted runoff into the Pacific Ocean.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that the county is responsible for the heavily polluted storm water flowing untreated each year down the Los Angeles and San Gabriel rivers.
The Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper environmental groups say the ruling is a turning point in the battle for clean water. Council attorney Aaron Colangelo says the county must now eliminate the flow of pollutants.
The Los Angeles Times says the Flood Control District argued its channels were simply conduits for upstream polluters, but the court says the district controls the flow to the ocean.
Related listings
-
Iowa bill on same-sex marriage licenses in trouble
Recent Cases 02/23/2011A measure that would bar Iowa county officials from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples faces a bleak future as it sits in a House committee. Top Republicans on Thursday said they have no plans to debate the issue, viewing it a nod to the p...
-
Court says convicted lawyer unfit to practice law
Recent Cases 01/26/2011The New Hampshire Supreme Court is making it clear that not everyone who passes the bar exam gets to practice law.The court has denied the appeal of a would-be lawyer who was shot down by its Committee on Character and Fitness.The applicant - identif...
-
Court hears challenge to $65M Facebook settlement
Recent Cases 01/13/2011Former Harvard University classmates of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg want to throw out a $65 million settlement of their lawsuit that alleged the social network was their idea.Lawyers for twins Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss argued their case befor...
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.