Ga. high court ousts pot-smoking judge from bench
Recent Cases
A Georgia judge who pointed a gun at himself in the courtroom, berated his boss in a bizarre televised rant and admitted to regularly smoking marijuana was ousted from the bench for life by the state's top court Tuesday.
The Georgia Supreme Court's unanimous opinion also barred Catoosa County Magistrate Anthony Peters from ever holding another judicial office in Georgia, concluding he has done "nothing to show that he has any ability to live up to the high standard of conduct expected of members of the judiciary in Georgia."
Peters' home phone number was disconnected, and his attorney Chris Townley did not return calls and emails Tuesday seeking comment. But Peters said during an April hearing that the violations took place during a "rough patch" in his life, and his attorney blamed his behavior on prescription drug abuse after his client was involved in a devastating 2005 ATV accident.
Peters, who is not an attorney, was a detective for the county sheriff's office for 10 years before he was appointed as a magistrate judge in 1997. But his demeanor started changing after a difficult 2005, which began when his father committed suicide and grew worse after the ATV accident. The magistrate was taking heavy doses of pain medications by 2009 after surgeries didn't ease the pain, his lawyer said.
Related listings
-
Shareholder class action hits Leighton
Recent Cases 09/01/2011Shareholders set to take legal action against Leighton over alleged failures to properly report a $907 million turnaround in financial performance. Law firm Maurice Blackburn on Thursday said it intended to launch a class action against the company, ...
-
Judge to hear arguments over Loughner's medication
Recent Cases 08/27/2011Attorneys for the Tucson shooting rampage suspect are making another attempt to stop the forced medication of their client at the Missouri prison facility where mental health experts are trying to make him psychologically fit to stand trial. A federa...
-
Del. pediatrician gets life for abusing patients
Recent Cases 08/26/2011A Delaware pediatrician convicted of sexually abusing scores of young patients over more than a decade was sentenced Friday to life in prison. Earl Bradley showed no emotion as a judge sentenced him to 14 life sentences for 14 counts of first-degree ...
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.