The COVID-19 pandemic has abruptly changed how hearings will conducted before the NJ Division of Workers Compensation [Division]. In light of State of Emergency Orders announced by NJ Gov. Pat Murphy that mandate social distancing and restricted travel, the DIvision has embarked upon limited virtual hearings.
Showing posts with label Florida. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Florida. Show all posts
Thursday, April 9, 2020
Tuesday, November 1, 2016
SCOTUS FL-Stahl : Petition Denied
The United States Supreme Court DENIED the petition in the matter of Stahl v Hialeah raising constitutional issues in the present workers' compensation system in Florida. The Florida program mirrors trending aspects of other state programs that have also been questioned on constitutional grounds.
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Florida Appeallate Court Rules Attorney Fee Statute Unconstitutional
The Florida First District Court of Appeals has held counsel fee provisions in the Workers' Compensation Act to be unconstitutional, ,"We hold that the challenged provisions violate Claimant’s First Amendment
guarantees of free speech, freedom of association, and right to petition for redress." Miles v City of Edgewater, Decided April 20, 2016, setting the stage for review by the Florida Supreme Court.
Today's guest post is authored by the Hon. David Langham, Deputy Chief Judge of Compensation Claims for the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims and Division of Administrative Hearings and is shared from http://flojcc.blogspot.com.
Today's guest post is authored by the Hon. David Langham, Deputy Chief Judge of Compensation Claims for the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims and Division of Administrative Hearings and is shared from http://flojcc.blogspot.com.
Friday, April 8, 2016
The Difficult Task of the Florida Supreme Court
The Florida Supreme has before it a constitutional challenge once again concerning workers’ compensation. The scope of the controversy remains undefined and the ultimate impact equally uncertain. I have found over the years that one cannot predict the outcome of a case by merely watching an oral argument.
Friday, January 9, 2015
Florida medical marijuana and the 2016 Election Cycle
The medical marijuana initiative may have a major effect n the future of not only the nation'a presidential outcome but also of the fate of workers' compensation in the State of Florida. As goes Florida in the 2016 election cycle so probably will the nation, because of the mechanics of the National count of electoral college votes.
The medical marijuana ballot question lost last off-year cycle because the liberal turnout was so low. The initiative could spur more voters to the poles and impact not only the Florida presidential count but also the local and state candidates.
Ironically, a large voter turnout will result in the election of more liberals into office in Florida will ultimately liberalize the state leadership and its present negative thoughts on benefits. The upcoming election may ultimately impact the pending judicial cases involving the constitutionality of Florida's workers' compensation act.
Today's post is shared from reuters.com/
| TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (Reuters) - The push to legalize medical marijuana in Florida continues with a two-pronged campaign, supporters said on Friday, sharing plans to mount another ballot drive in 2016 as a way to pressure state lawmakers to consider legislation permitting prescription pot. A constitutional amendment to legalize medical marijuana in Florida last year fell just short of the 60 percent approval needed to pass in the state. Morgan, who spent about $4 million on his United for Care campaign last year, said he has revised the ballot language to... |
Read more about medical marijuana and workers' compensation:
Workers' Compensation: Florida: Legalizing Marijuana Fails ...
Nov 05, 2014
Copyright. (c) 2014 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved. Wednesday, November 5, 2014. Florida: Legalizing Marijuana Fails to Pass. Amendment 2. Amend Constitution to legalize medical marijuana? ANSWER, VOTES, PCT.
http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/
For Marijuana, a Second Wave of Votes to Legalize
Oct 29, 2014
As the libertarian movement in the Republican Party has gained force, with leaders like Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, supporting decriminalization of marijuana and others going even further, an anchor of the ...
http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/
Workers' Compensation: Marijuana and Workers' Comp
Sep 08, 2014
There are some who believe medical marijuana and the workplace are a potent mix just waiting to be stirred as increasingly more states approve the herb and its derivatives for medicinal use. Not only are states approving the ...
http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/
Court Rules Workers Comp Must Cover Medical Marijuana
Sep 22, 2014
"Indeed, medical marijuana is a controlled substance and is a drug,” the court wrote. “Instead of a written order from a health care provider, it requires the functional equivalent of a prescription - certification to the program.
http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Perfecting a Florida Workers' Compensation Lien
| Florida continues to be ahead of the curve in implementing an effective and efficient electronic filing/docket system for workers' compensation claims. Today's post is authored by Judge David Langham and is shared from http://flojcc.blogspot.com/ Judge David Langham is the Deputy Chief Judge of Compensation Claims for the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims and Division of Administrative Hearings. The Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims (OJCC) is paperless, or nearly so. While there are a few judges who keep some small volume of paper files for convenience, the digital record and database is the official record of the OJCC. When a document is filed, there has to be some place on the computer to put that document. The logistics therefore involve the creation of a “case” within the OJCC database. Everything related to a particular accident for a particular injured worker will be stored digitally at the OJCC and electronically connected with or "tethered to" that electronic “case.” An OJCC workers’ compensation “case” is commenced in one of two ways. A petition for benefits may be filed. Rule 60Q-6.105(1). In the event that there is “any claim” within the jurisdiction of this Office, which is “not subject to a petition for benefits,” then “the claimant shall file with the clerk of the OJCC a request for assignment of case number,” referred to often as an “RACN.”Rule 60Q-6.105(3). Filing either of these automatically causes an OJCC “case” to be commenced. A case number is... |
Monday, August 25, 2014
The Father of the 11th Circuit Court Decision
| Today's post is authored by Peter Rousmaniere and shared from workcompcentral.com The Florida 11th Circuit Court decision on Aug. 13 appears to be the first state court decision in many years to declare an entire workers’ compensation statute as unconstitutional. The fingerprints of the Dean of Workers’ Compensation Research John Burton are all over Judge Jorge Cueto’s reasoning. Since the 1970s, Burton, with a law degree and PhD in economics, has been the leading academic scholar in workers’ compensation, even now years after his retirement from a faculty position at Rutgers University. Burton surely thinks that this decision is long coming. So, what’s his complaint? Cueto wrote that through the years, the state has cut back permanent partial disability benefits so severely that the state “no longer provides any benefits for this class of disabled worker.” Burton’s writings indicate that he holds that whatever permanent disability benefits there are in Florida, they are so low and PPD so significant, that the entire workers’ comp system in Florida is inadequate. Cueto agrees. He cites National Council on Compensation Insurance estimates that legislative changes in 1979, 1990, 1994 and 2003 cut PPD benefits severely. Per Burton, Florida “eviscerated the permanent partial benefit system.” The current benefits are “less than available during the 1970s and markedly lower than... |
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Florida Businesses, Insurers to Fight Ruling Overturning Workers’ Comp System
| The battle lines are being drawn in the State of Florida as the challenge to the FL workers' compensation law continues following a judicial ruling that the act was unconstitutional because it has been emasculated by Industry reform and its effectiveness diminished to point of rendering the act void. Today's post is shared from .insurancejournal.com A Florida circuit court judge has ruled that the state’s workers’ compensation law is unconstitutional because it no longer provides adequate benefits to injured workers giving up their right to sue. Florida 11th Circuit Court Judge Jorge Cueto handed down the ruling in a case (Padgett v. State of Florida No. 11-13661 CA 25) that could upend the state’s nearly 80-year workers’ compensation law. The case has its genesis in a 2012 instance where a state government worker, Elsa Padgett, sustained an on-the-job injury. After a fall, Padgett had to have a shoulder surgically replaced and was forced to retire due to complications. Padgett, along with several trial bar groups, argued that her workers’ compensation benefits were inadequate and the law unfairly blocked her constitutional right to access the court. The workers’ compensation system is by law the “exclusive remedy” for injured workers. Injured workers are provided medical benefits and certain wage-loss benefits in exchange for forgoing the right to sue their employer in court. Cueto, in a 20-page ruling, avoided making any specific comments on the details of Padgett’s case other than to rule in her favor. Instead, Cueto focused on the exclusive remedy provision of the law, finding that due to the many cuts in medical and wage-loss benefits made by lawmakers over the years, the system no longer represents a fair deal for injured workers. Cueto singled-out workers’... |
Saturday, August 16, 2014
Judge rules Florida workers' compensation law unconstitutional
The emasculation of the US workers' compensation system continues as the economic unbalance in the nation has escalates. Ironically the latest assault is a successful constitutional challenged by the organized bar of diminishing legal representatives of injured workers. The judicial decision may result in potential political upheaval as Florida is facing an upcoming gubernatorial election. More importantly the decision is yet another signal that workers' compensation as a social remedial legislation has failed to dynamically adapt to its changing role in the nation's evolving medical delivery network and disability benefit structure.
Today's post is shared from jurist.com
The 11th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida [official website] in Miami on Wednesday ruled [order, PDF] that Florida's workers' compensation law [text] is unconstitutional. Prior to the ruling, Attorney General Pam Bondi [official website] issued a response [text, PDF] to the court's order to show cause, asking the court to rule the law as unconstitutional in the form of an advisory opinion. In his ruling, Judge Jorge Cueto stated that the law is the exclusive remedy for injured workers, and therefore, only under rare circumstances can they sue their employers. Pursuant to Florida Supreme Court precedent, to be a constitutional worker's compensation act, it must provide some level of permanent partial disability benefit. Because it does not provide these remedies, the judge found that the act does is not an adequate replacement for the tort remedies that it supplanted.
Workers' rights continue to be an issue in the US. Last month, the US Supreme Court [official website] granted certiorari [JURIST report] in eight cases, including Young v. United Parcel Service [docket; cert. petition, PDF]. In that case, the court will consider whether, and in what circumstances, an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant employees with work limitations must provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are "similar in their ability or inability to work."
Today's post is shared from jurist.com
The 11th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida [official website] in Miami on Wednesday ruled [order, PDF] that Florida's workers' compensation law [text] is unconstitutional. Prior to the ruling, Attorney General Pam Bondi [official website] issued a response [text, PDF] to the court's order to show cause, asking the court to rule the law as unconstitutional in the form of an advisory opinion. In his ruling, Judge Jorge Cueto stated that the law is the exclusive remedy for injured workers, and therefore, only under rare circumstances can they sue their employers. Pursuant to Florida Supreme Court precedent, to be a constitutional worker's compensation act, it must provide some level of permanent partial disability benefit. Because it does not provide these remedies, the judge found that the act does is not an adequate replacement for the tort remedies that it supplanted.
Workers' rights continue to be an issue in the US. Last month, the US Supreme Court [official website] granted certiorari [JURIST report] in eight cases, including Young v. United Parcel Service [docket; cert. petition, PDF]. In that case, the court will consider whether, and in what circumstances, an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant employees with work limitations must provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are "similar in their ability or inability to work."
Friday, July 25, 2014
United Airlines' Outsourcing Jobs to Company That Pays Near-Poverty Wages Is Shameful
On October 1, United Airlines is planning to outsource 630 gate agent jobs at 12 airports to companies that pay near-poverty level wages. The airports affected include Salt Lake City; Charlotte, North Carolina; Pensacola, Florida; Detroit and Des Moines, Iowa.
As a result hundreds of employees who formerly made middle-class, living wages will be forced to transfer to other cities, take early retirement or seek employment elsewhere. Union employees who have been with the company for years -- many making a respectable $50,000-per-year salaries -- will be replaced by non-union employees who will be paid less than half -- between $9.50 and $12 per hour.
Nine-fifty an hour is a poverty-level wage if you are trying to support a family -- and $12 barely exceeds the poverty level. In fact at $12 a family of three makes so little that they are eligible for food stamps.
That, in effect, means that United and its subcontractor will be subsidized by American taxpayers for the food stamp payments made to their new low-wage workers.
United's move to convert middle-class jobs into near-poverty level jobs is shameful -- it's that simple.
And United's move to cut employee pay is emblematic of corporate America's systematic campaign to lower wages and destroy the American middle class in order to increase returns to Wall Street shareholders. It is exactly the kind of action that must come to a screeching halt if the middle class is to survive -- and our children are once again be able to look...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Saturday, July 19, 2014
Senate Briefing “Asbestos: The Impact on Public Health and the Environment” a Huge Success!!
Today's post is shared from adao.us.
On July 17, we were proud to continue the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization‘s efforts to protect asbestos victims’ civil rights and public health by hosting our sixth Congressional Staff Briefing this time on “Asbestos: The Impact on Public Health and the Environment.” This Senate briefing was a huge success with over 60 people attending and 28 states represented.
ADAO would like to extend a big thank you to all the senators who sent staffers.
1. Alabama – Session
2. Arkansas – Pryor
3. California – Feinstein
4. California –Boxer
5. Colorado – Bennet
6. Connecticut – Blumenthal
7. Florida – Nelson
8. Georgia – Isakson
9. Idaho – Crapo
10.Illinois – Durbin
11.Indiana – Coats
12.Indiana – Donnelly
13.Iowa – Harkin
14.Kansas – Roberts
15.Kentucky – Paul
16.Louisiana – Vitter
17.Maine – King
18.Massachusetts – Markey
19.Montana – Tester
20.New Jersey – Booker
21.New Mexico – Udall
22.Ohio – Portman
23.Oklahoma – Inhofe
24.Oregon – Merkley
25.Oregon – Wyden
26.Pennsylvania – Casey
27.Rhode Island – Reed
28.South Dakota – Johnson
29.Utah – Hatch
30.Vermont – Sanders
31.Washington – Murray
The major...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
On July 17, we were proud to continue the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization‘s efforts to protect asbestos victims’ civil rights and public health by hosting our sixth Congressional Staff Briefing this time on “Asbestos: The Impact on Public Health and the Environment.” This Senate briefing was a huge success with over 60 people attending and 28 states represented.
ADAO would like to extend a big thank you to all the senators who sent staffers.
1. Alabama – Session
2. Arkansas – Pryor
3. California – Feinstein
4. California –Boxer
5. Colorado – Bennet
6. Connecticut – Blumenthal
7. Florida – Nelson
8. Georgia – Isakson
9. Idaho – Crapo
10.Illinois – Durbin
11.Indiana – Coats
12.Indiana – Donnelly
13.Iowa – Harkin
14.Kansas – Roberts
15.Kentucky – Paul
16.Louisiana – Vitter
17.Maine – King
18.Massachusetts – Markey
19.Montana – Tester
20.New Jersey – Booker
21.New Mexico – Udall
22.Ohio – Portman
23.Oklahoma – Inhofe
24.Oregon – Merkley
25.Oregon – Wyden
26.Pennsylvania – Casey
27.Rhode Island – Reed
28.South Dakota – Johnson
29.Utah – Hatch
30.Vermont – Sanders
31.Washington – Murray
The major...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
New CDC Report on Opiods
Today's guest post is by The Hon. David Langham who is the Deputy Chief Judge of Compensation Claims for the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims and Division of Administrative Hearings flojcc.blogspot.com
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently issued a report on opiod painkillers. It concludes that prescriptions for opiods remain more common in the United States than anywhere else in the world. In 2012 there were 259 million prescriptions written for painkillers in this country. The report concludes this is "enough for every American adult to have a bottle of pills." (In the interest of full disclosure, I did not get mine, so someone must have gotten my share).
Drug overdose and interaction remains a problem in this country. According to the CDC "deaths from drug overdose have been rising steadily over the past two decades." Each day, "113 people die as a result of drug overdose and another 6,748 are treated in emergency departments for the misuse or abuse of drugs." The CDC says that 9 of 10 "poisoning deaths are caused by drugs."
The report quantifies the number of prescriptions per 100 people in each state (in parenthesis that follow). The five states with the most opiod prescriptions were Alabama (143), Kentucky (128), Oklahoma (128), Tennessee (143), and West Virginia (138). These are labelled as the "highest" states in the study. The five states labelled the "lowest" volume were California (57), Hawaii (52), Minnesota (62), New Jersey (63) and New York (60).
Florida is in the large group of 21 states categorized as "below average" in the study, with 73 prescriptions per 100...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently issued a report on opiod painkillers. It concludes that prescriptions for opiods remain more common in the United States than anywhere else in the world. In 2012 there were 259 million prescriptions written for painkillers in this country. The report concludes this is "enough for every American adult to have a bottle of pills." (In the interest of full disclosure, I did not get mine, so someone must have gotten my share).
Drug overdose and interaction remains a problem in this country. According to the CDC "deaths from drug overdose have been rising steadily over the past two decades." Each day, "113 people die as a result of drug overdose and another 6,748 are treated in emergency departments for the misuse or abuse of drugs." The CDC says that 9 of 10 "poisoning deaths are caused by drugs."
The report quantifies the number of prescriptions per 100 people in each state (in parenthesis that follow). The five states with the most opiod prescriptions were Alabama (143), Kentucky (128), Oklahoma (128), Tennessee (143), and West Virginia (138). These are labelled as the "highest" states in the study. The five states labelled the "lowest" volume were California (57), Hawaii (52), Minnesota (62), New Jersey (63) and New York (60).
Florida is in the large group of 21 states categorized as "below average" in the study, with 73 prescriptions per 100...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
NJ Senate Passes Law To Help Injured Workers
The NJ Senate took an historic step on Monday by passing legislation to assist injured workers navigate the workers' system and to level the playing field after decades of the erosion. By passing passing S374 the NJ Senate encourages attorneys to represent workers who suffered accidents and diseases arising out of their employment.
The century old NJ workers' compensation system was built on the premise of providing speedy and remedial benefits to workers who are injured as a result of an occupational injury or exposure. The system was theoretically a "promise" made by employers to provide an easier, quicker and faster administrative benefit program without the need to proceed with a claim in the litigious, expensive and complicated civil justice system.
The system was established to be a self-executing administrative system. It was to operate in an informal setting without the need for lawyers and litigation.
Unfortunately, over the decades, things became more complicated and complex. Denial and delay became a prevailing theme.
Exposures not envisioned in the original 1911 Act, ie. silicosis (and later asbestosis) were brought into the program to shield insurance carriers and employers from limitless compensatory and punitive damages from toxic exposure claims. This is revealed historically through New Jersey litigation, ie. "The Summer Simpson Papers," see Austin v Johns-Manville, corporate conspiracy.
Additionally, new and expensive treatment modalities/protocols, pharmaceutical regimens and wage equality, as well as other factors, increased costs to the compensation system.
The need increased over the decades for injured workers to have legal knowledgeable legal representation. The NJ Supreme Court recognized that need and established an attorney certification program.
In an effort to limit costs and exposures employers and their insurance carriers have attempted to make changes in the name of "reform" that calls for the reduction and/or elimination of legal representation by attorneys. Obviously if legal fees are eliminated then an injured worker has difficulty in finding a lawyer. Both the State of Florida and the State of California have utilized this tactic.
Senate Bill No. 374 is step forward to help injured workers and their families. While workers' compensation is a consequence of unsafe working conditions, the enactment of this law will hopefully add an economic incentive for employers to maintain safer working conditions. That will be a positive reform to the end of reducing workers' compensation costs overall.
The legislation passed by the NJ Senate will assist injured workers in gaining legal representation and reverses a tide to eliminate attorneys from the process. For decades employers and their insurance carriers have only made voluntary offers and tenders of disability payments after the appearance of an attorney on behalf of an injured worker in a matter. No legal fees were earned and attorneys barely got paid to handle the claim going forward.
Currently, legal fees are subject to the discretion of the Compensation Judge and are capped at 20% of the award, excluding voluntary (bona fide) tender and offers.
This legislation benefits injured workers and is an attempt to level the playing field. This legislation should be supported.
"The Senate Judiciary Committee reports favorably and with
committee amendments Senate Bill No. 374.
This bill, as amended, requires that in cases in which a workers’
compensation petitioner has received compensation from an insurance
company prior to any judgment or award, the reasonable allowance for
attorney fees will be based upon the sum of the amount of
compensation received by the petitioner prior to any judgment, but
after the establishment of an attorney-client relationship pursuant to a
written agreement, and the amount of the judgment or award in excess
of the amount of compensation already received by the petitioner.
Currently, in cases in which a petitioner has received compensation
prior to a judgment or award, a reasonable attorney fee is based upon
only that part of the judgment or award that is in excess of the amount
of compensation already received by the petitioner.
This bill was pre-filed for introduction in the 2014-2015 session
pending technical review. As reported, the bill includes the changes
required by technical review, which has been performed. "
The century old NJ workers' compensation system was built on the premise of providing speedy and remedial benefits to workers who are injured as a result of an occupational injury or exposure. The system was theoretically a "promise" made by employers to provide an easier, quicker and faster administrative benefit program without the need to proceed with a claim in the litigious, expensive and complicated civil justice system.
The system was established to be a self-executing administrative system. It was to operate in an informal setting without the need for lawyers and litigation.
Unfortunately, over the decades, things became more complicated and complex. Denial and delay became a prevailing theme.
Exposures not envisioned in the original 1911 Act, ie. silicosis (and later asbestosis) were brought into the program to shield insurance carriers and employers from limitless compensatory and punitive damages from toxic exposure claims. This is revealed historically through New Jersey litigation, ie. "The Summer Simpson Papers," see Austin v Johns-Manville, corporate conspiracy.
Additionally, new and expensive treatment modalities/protocols, pharmaceutical regimens and wage equality, as well as other factors, increased costs to the compensation system.
The need increased over the decades for injured workers to have legal knowledgeable legal representation. The NJ Supreme Court recognized that need and established an attorney certification program.
In an effort to limit costs and exposures employers and their insurance carriers have attempted to make changes in the name of "reform" that calls for the reduction and/or elimination of legal representation by attorneys. Obviously if legal fees are eliminated then an injured worker has difficulty in finding a lawyer. Both the State of Florida and the State of California have utilized this tactic.
Senate Bill No. 374 is step forward to help injured workers and their families. While workers' compensation is a consequence of unsafe working conditions, the enactment of this law will hopefully add an economic incentive for employers to maintain safer working conditions. That will be a positive reform to the end of reducing workers' compensation costs overall.
….
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Its Déjà Vu All Over Again
Today's post is shared from Judge David Langham and I would encourage to read his blog at: http://flojcc.blogspot.com/ David Langham is the Deputy Chief Judge of Compensation Claims for the Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims and Division of Administrative Hearings.
Zohydro is in the news yet again. This month the new medication will become available. Its manufacturer says it will market this only to a select few physicians whose experience with pain will assure their discretion and restraint in distributing this strong pain killer.
In November, I noted the approval of this new Opiod formulation, and in December, I wrote when over half the nation’s attorneys general wrote to the FDA urging that the approval receive greater scrutiny and perhaps reconsideration (Zohydro in the News Again).
Well, as Yogi Bera once said “its déjà vu all over again.” Zohydro is back in the news at the end of February. Now, an “activist” group is questioning the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)and has released a letter it sent to the FDA in late February. The group is called “Fed Up!” and their points are interesting.
They note that Zohydro is being marketed in the “midst of a severe drug addiction epidemic.” They note that Zohydro “will kill people as soon as it is released.” Dr. Andrew Kolodny calls it “a whopping dose of hydrocodone packed in...
|
Related Articles:
Florida Workers' Compensation FIlings Continue to Decrease
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Judge Disqualified over Facebook ‘Friend’ Request
Back in February, the American Bar Association cautioned judges about their use of social media. While sites like Facebook and Twitter can help judges stay in touch with the wider world, the ABA admonished that they should think twice before “friending,” “liking,” or “following” somebody.
A case in Florida drives home that concern.
The dispute centers around a circuit court judge who presided over a divorce proceeding. Before entering a final judgment, Judge Linda D. Schoonover sent the wife a Facebook “friend” request that the woman didn’t accept, according to court documents. In a complaint, the lawyer for the wife accused the judge of then retaliating against her by allegedly saddling her with “most of the marital debt” and giving the husband “a disproportionately excessive alimony award.”
Last week, an appellate court kicked the judge off the case and assigned the matter to a different judge, concluding that the wife had a “well-founded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.”
The unrequited friend request “placed the litigant between the proverbial rock and a hard place: either engage in improper ex parte communications with the judge presiding over the case or risk offending the judge by not accepting the ‘friend’ request,” the appeals court wrote in its Jan. 24 decision. (Chicago intellectual property attorney Evan Brown, who blogs about...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Thursday, January 16, 2014
NLRB Office of the General Counsel Issues Complaint against Walmart
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Office of the General Counsel has issued a consolidated complaint against Walmart alleging that the company violated the rights of its employees as a result of activities surrounding employee protests in 13 states.
The Office of the General Counsel informed Walmart that complaints were authorized in November of 2013, but withheld issuing the complaints to allow time for settlement discussions. The discussions have not been successful and a consolidated complaint has issued regarding some of the alleged violations of federal law. More than 60 Walmart supervisors and one corporate officer are named in the complaint.
Cases were consolidated to avoid unnecessary costs or delay. Walmart must respond to the complaint by January 28, 2014. No hearing date has been set. The Office of General Counsel has authorized or issued complaints in other Walmart cases and additional charges remain under investigation.
The National Labor Relations Act guarantees the right of private sector employees to act together to try to improve their wages and working conditions with or without a union. The consolidated complaint involves more than 60 employees, 19 of whom were discharged allegedly as a result of their participation in activities protected by the National Labor Relations Act. The Office of the General Counsel alleges that Walmart violated the Act when:
During two national television news broadcasts and in statements to employees at Walmart stores in California and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened employees with reprisal if they engaged in strikes and protests.
At stores in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington, Walmart unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests.
At stores in California, Florida, and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities
The Office of the General Counsel informed Walmart that complaints were authorized in November of 2013, but withheld issuing the complaints to allow time for settlement discussions. The discussions have not been successful and a consolidated complaint has issued regarding some of the alleged violations of federal law. More than 60 Walmart supervisors and one corporate officer are named in the complaint.
Cases were consolidated to avoid unnecessary costs or delay. Walmart must respond to the complaint by January 28, 2014. No hearing date has been set. The Office of General Counsel has authorized or issued complaints in other Walmart cases and additional charges remain under investigation.
The National Labor Relations Act guarantees the right of private sector employees to act together to try to improve their wages and working conditions with or without a union. The consolidated complaint involves more than 60 employees, 19 of whom were discharged allegedly as a result of their participation in activities protected by the National Labor Relations Act. The Office of the General Counsel alleges that Walmart violated the Act when:
During two national television news broadcasts and in statements to employees at Walmart stores in California and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened employees with reprisal if they engaged in strikes and protests.
At stores in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington, Walmart unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests.
At stores in California, Florida, and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities
Related articles
Monday, December 30, 2013
Emily Oster’s graph of the year: Why is the U.S. falling behind in life expectancy?
Time has its "Person of the Year." Amazon has its books of the year. Pretty Much Amazing has its mixtapes of the year. Buzzfeed has its insane-stories-from-Florida of the year. And Wonkblog, of course, has its graphs of the year. For 2013, we asked some of the year's most interesting, important and influential thinkers to name their favorite graph of the year — and why they chose it.
Amidst all the focus on health insurance, I think it’s crucial not to lose focus on the fact that -- insurance or not -- the United States is lagging behind in health status. This chart -- from a broader report -- demonstrates not only how low our life expectancy is relative to other developed countries, but also how far we have fallen even in the last 30 years. Why are we not realizing the same gains that countries with comparable incomes are?
Emily Oster is an associate professor of economics at the University of Chicago Booth School. Her book is "Expecting Better: Why the Conventional Pregnancy Wisdom Is Wrong."See all the graphs of 2013 here, including entries from Jonathan Franzen, Bill McKibben, and Ta-Nehisi Coates.
[Click here to see the original post]
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Florida New Case Filings Continue To Go South
 |
| FL New Case Filings Decrease |
Click here to read the complete report.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Constitutional Challenges New and Old, From Florida to Oklahoma
Today's post highlights the slow and tedious battle a contitutional challenge is to a workers' compensation issue. It is shared from flojcc.blogspot.com.
There is a value to consistency and predictability in the law. Attorneys rely upon the decisions of courts to form opinions about their cases. Attorneys with a clear understanding of their state's statutes, and the interpretations which appellate courts will apply to them, are in an admirable position to provide their clients with predictions and advice regarding their specific case and its issues. In Florida, this can take time. Sometimes such specifics can take many years. In 1993, the Florida Legislature made significant changes to the Florida Workers' Compensation law. Among these was a marked reduction in the quantum of temporary total disability benefits available, from 260 weeks to to 104 weeks. A panel of the Florida First District Court of Appeal ("First DCA") concluded on February 28, 2013 that this statutory change was Unconstitutional. Westphal v. St. Petersburg. (1D12-3563)On September 23, 2013, the Court granted en banc review. This means that the entire First DCA reconsidered the case and issued a new opinion. In this second iteration, a majority of the Court concluded that the 104 week limitation on temporary total disability (TTD) did apply to the claimant, Mr. Westphal. The en banc decision did not find Constitutional infirmity in the statute, as the panel had months earlier....
|
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Supreme Court 2013: Court Could Cripple Unions In Major Labor Cases
Over the next few months, the Supreme Court will hear two major cases that could prove a major setback to unions' ability to organize and collect dues -- and the conservative majority on the court is making pro-labor advocates nervous.
In UNITE HERE Local 355 v. Mulhall, the court will decide whether agreements between unions and employers that set the ground rules for union organizing violate the anti-corruption provision of the Labor Management Relations Act. That may sound pretty specific, but it could have far-reaching effects, leading labor expert and Harvard Law School professor Benjamin Sachs to write that this “could be the most significant labor law case in a generation.” In this particular case, the union, Unite Here Local 355, struck an agreement with Mardi Gras, a Florida casino company, under which the casino would not interfere in the union’s organizing drive, and in return, the union promised not to strike during that organizing period. That kind of agreement is standard practice across the country. The challenge to this routine agreement alleges that the casino’s concessions to the union, which included a promise to remain neutral during the organizing campaign, violates an anti-corruption statute that was intended to keep employers from bribing unions by specifically prohibiting companies from giving union officials “things of value.” Until very recently, no one considered that these organizing agreements would constitute... |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)