Court likely to overturn Calif. law on livestock
Recent Cases
The Supreme Court seemed ready Wednesday to block a California law that would require euthanizing downed livestock at federally inspected slaughterhouses to keep the meat out of the nation's food system.
The court heard an appeal from the National Meat Association, which wants a 2009 state law blocked from going into effect. California barred the purchase, sale and butchering of animals that can't walk and required slaughterhouses under the threat of fines and jail time to immediately kill nonambulatory animals.
But justices said that encroached on federal laws that don't require immediate euthanizing.
"The federal law does not require me immediately to go over and euthanize the cow. Your law does require me to go over and immediately euthanize the cow. And therefore, your law seems an additional requirement in respect to the operations of a federally inspected meatpacking facility," Justice Stephen Breyer told a California lawyer.
Related listings
-
Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action
Recent Cases 11/10/2011Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Diamond Foods, Inc. and certain of its officers. The class action (CV 11 5399 RS) filed in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, is on beh...
-
Saxena White P.A. Files a Securities Fraud Class Action
Recent Cases 11/08/2011Saxena White P.A. announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased Agnico-Eagle Mines Limited common stock on the New York Stock Exchange...
-
Supreme Court looks at warrantless GPS tracking
Recent Cases 11/08/2011The Supreme Court has expressed deep reservations about police use of GPS technology to track criminal suspects without a warrant. But the justices appeared unsettled Tuesday about how or whether to regulate GPS tracking and other high-tech surveilla...

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.