Florida asks court to deny inmate's execution-delay request
Recent Cases
Florida has asked the state's high court to reject a condemned inmate's request to delay his execution based on the U.S. Supreme Court's finding that Florida's procedure for imposing the death penalty is illegal.
In a brief filed Thursday, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi's office said the U.S. Supreme Court's finding should not be applied retroactively to already-settled death penalty cases.
Ruling on the Hurst v. Florida case Tuesday, the nation's highest court ruled 8-1 that Florida's procedure is flawed because it allows judges, not juries, to decide death sentences.
Attorneys for convicted killer Michael Lambrix cited the ruling in their request for a new sentencing hearing for him.
Lambrix is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection on Feb. 11.
It wasn't clear when the court would rule.
Related listings
-
US court rejects Virginia death row inmate's appeal
Recent Cases 11/30/2015A federal appeals court has rejected a Virginia death row inmate's appeal of his murder-for-hire conviction. Ivan Teleguz was sentenced to death in 2006 for hiring a man to kill his former girlfriend, Stephanie Sipe, in Harrisonburg. After two key pr...
-
High court directs Andhra Pradesh government to prepare summer plan
Recent Cases 11/25/2015The Hyderabad High Court has directed the Andhra Pradesh government to take steps to protect people from heat waves during summer season. The bench of acting Chief Justice Dilip B Bhosale and Justice S Ravi Kumar gave AP two weeks to come up with a p...
-
Texas man executed for setting fire that killed 3 children
Recent Cases 11/18/2015A Texas inmate was executed Wednesday for setting a fire that killed his 18-month-old daughter and her two young half-sisters at an East Texas home 15 years ago. Raphael Holiday, 36, became the 13th convicted killer put to death this year in Texas, w...
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.