Heather loses court judgment appeal
Recent Cases
Heather Mills has failed to stop publication of a divorce judgment highly critical of her as a witness and her financial claims against Sir Paul McCartney.
Mr Justice Bennett said her evidence was "not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid".
And he ended his ruling with a word of advice for anyone who puts forward "an excessive, indeed exorbitant, claim". They have only themselves to blame if the court awards much less than what they expected, he said.
Former model Miss Mills sought an award of almost £125 million but the judge decided she should leave her marriage to the former Beatle with a total of £24.3 million.
Mr Justice Bennett had released the financial details of his ruling on Monday but gave Miss Mills a chance to appeal his decision to release the full judgment.
Two appeal judges refused her request for permission to appeal and the judgment on her private divorce battle with Sir Paul became public.
The husband's evidence, said the judge, was balanced. "He expressed himself moderately though at times with justifiable irritation, if not anger. He was consistent, accurate and honest."
The judge continued: "But I regret to have to say I cannot say the same about the wife's evidence.
"Having watched and listened to her give evidence... I am driven to the conclusion that much of her evidence, both written and oral, was not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid. Overall she was a less than impressive witness."
Mr Justice Bennett said Miss Mills, who lost part of her leg in a road accident, was a "strong-willed and determined personality" who had shown great fortitude in overcoming her disability. He added that she was a "kindly person" who is devoted to her charitable causes.
Related listings
-
Court Will Decide Wash. Shooting Case
Recent Cases 03/17/2008The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider reinstating the murder conviction of the driver in a gang-related drive-by shooting that horrified Seattle in 1994.The court will hear arguments in the fall in the case of Cesar Sarausad II. He was convicte...
-
Court to Take Up Voting Rights Suit
Recent Cases 03/17/2008WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court said on Monday it would decide a potentially important voting rights case and whether crime lab reports can be used as trial evidence without the testimony of analysts who prepared them.In a case from North Ca...
-
Palo Alto loses legal battle over police brutality
Recent Cases 03/14/2008The city of Palo Alto on Wednesday lost an 11-year legal battle over whether police officers violated a man's civil rights and now faces the prospect of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to finally settle the case. The California Supreme Court ...
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.