BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 119th day of 2013. So far, 3,120 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 217 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you'll love our monthly newsletter - and best of all, it's FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
Created from stories published April 22-26.
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 112th day of 2013. So far, 2,974 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 206 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you'll love our monthly newsletter - and best of all, it's FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 105th day of 2013. So far, 2,848 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 200 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you'll love our monthly newsletter - and best of all, it's FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 98th day of 2013. So far, 2,710 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 184 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you'll love our monthly newsletter - and best of all, it's FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
THE LAW: Sharon Stone Faces Trial for Racist Abuse
Sharon Stone failed in her attempt to have a lawsuit brought against her by her former nanny tossed. The nanny, a Filipino worker, has accused the actress of racist abuse. Stone’s failure to have the case squashed opens the door to a collection of bad press days ahead for the “Basic Instinct” star. A Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that Erlinda Elemen, who claims Stone subjected her to "numerous derogatory comments and slurs" could pursue her allegations of harassment, failure to prevent harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination against the actress.
Just a few days earlier Stone was the subject of another lawsuit – this time from her former housekeeper, Angelica Castillo, who accused the actress of wrongful termination. The lawsuit claims that Stone verbally abused her and forced her to work against doctor’s orders due to a back injury she suffered while carting around Stone’s groceries. "Other employees were present at the residence and could have assisted with the lifting and moving, but were not allowed to do so," the lawsuit Castillo claims. "Stone repeatedly yelled at Plaintiff for performing her duties more slowly, and called her 'crazy' and 'stupid.'" Ms. Castillo claims she was fired as "retaliation for seeking medical leave."
A statement from Stone’s lawyers dismissed Castillo’s claims as "bizarre and ridiculous" and "malicious." Stone’s representative insisted, "Ms. Castillo was never fired, and as of today is still covered by health insurance [as] an employee of Ms. Stone. Her claim that she was supposedly wrongfully terminated is absurd, just like the rest of the lawsuit's fabricated and baseless allegations. We are confident that Ms. Stone will prevail in this meritless case, and once that occurs, she intends to pursue affirmative claims for malicious prosecution against those responsible for filing and prosecuting this specious lawsuit."
Ms. Elemen was hired in October 2006 to take care of Stone's three adopted children – Roan, Laird and Quinn. Elemen says she was targeted by Stone with slurs about her Filipino heritage. "These statements included, without limitation, comments about Plaintiff's Filipino accent (i.e. Plaintiff was instructed to refrain from speaking to the children because Defendant did not want them to 'talk like you,') comments about Filipino food, and comments which equated being Filipino with being stupid," the court papers stated.
In addition, Elemen’s lawyers say Stone "was repeatedly verbally dismissive of Plaintiff's deeply held religious beliefs," and was told she could not read the Bible in her room. "We're pleased that the judge recognized that the plaintiff's claims should proceed," said Ms. Elemen's lawyer, Solomon Gresen, following Friday's ruling.
SOURCE: Daily Mail, CNN International, Telegraph UK
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 91st day of 2013. So far, 2,625 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 181 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
Created from stories published March 25 - 29.
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 84th day of 2013. So far, 2,416 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 167 of those deaths.
If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508
Created from stories published March 18 - 22, 2013.
If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508
Mel’s Thoughts: The Supreme Court, in dealing with the gay marriage issue, will have two well-known advocates supporting gay marriage: David Boies, a famed progressive, and Ted Olsen, an iconic conservative who is a leader of the Federalist Society from whence came Justices Scalia, Alito and Chief Roberts.
This dynamic duo chose San Francisco to start the case and miraculously was assigned a gay judge to handle the case. The case was fast-tracked and the appeal heard rapidly by the appellate court, to find an eagerly-awaiting US Supreme Court, not surprisingly, granting a hard-to-obtain leave to appeal.
If this all seems well planned, it is because it most likely was, with a highly probable result that will make Senator Portman's son very happy.
Mel’s Thoughts: The Supreme Court, in dealing with the gay marriage issue, will have two well-known advocates supporting gay marriage: David Boies, a famed progressive, and Ted Olsen, an iconic conservative who is a leader of the Federalist Society from whence came Justices Scalia, Alito and Chief Roberts.
This dynamic duo chose San Francisco to start the case and miraculously was assigned a gay judge to handle the case. The case was fast-tracked and the appeal heard rapidly by the appellate court, to find an eagerly-awaiting US Supreme Court, not surprisingly, granting a hard-to-obtain leave to appeal.
If this all seems well planned, it is because it most likely was, with a highly probable result that will make Senator Portman's son very happy.
Mel’s Thoughts: The Supreme Court, in dealing with the gay marriage issue, will have two well-known advocates supporting gay marriage: David Boies, a famed progressive, and Ted Olsen, an iconic conservative who is a leader of the Federalist Society from whence came Justices Scalia, Alito and Chief Roberts.
This dynamic duo chose San Francisco to start the case and miraculously was assigned a gay judge to handle the case. The case was fast-tracked and the appeal heard rapidly by the appellate court, to find an eagerly-awaiting US Supreme Court, not surprisingly, granting a hard-to-obtain leave to appeal.
If this all seems well planned, it is because it most likely was, with a highly probable result that will make Senator Portman's son very happy.
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 77th day of 2013. So far, 2,180 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 149 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
Created from stories published March 11 - 15, 2013.
If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508
THE LAW: MULTI-MILLION $$ JUDGMENT AGAINST CBS SHOW TOSSED
The price was not right for the California Supreme Court when it came to affirming a $7.7 million judgment that model Brandi Cochran was awarded in her lawsuit against The Price Is Right Productions and its producers FremantleMedia North America. Cochran claimed that she was a victim of discrimination and was wrongfully terminated from the long-running hit daytime show after she became pregnant. But now the CA Supremes say the jury received improper instructions and the case has to be retried. Cochran’s attorney Carney Shegerian isn’t concerned, however. He told Associated Press, “I think on re-trial I’ll get triple or quadruple [$7.7 million].”
The producers successfully argued that in discrimination cases, a judge has to tell the jury that discrimination is not just a “motivating factor/reason” for termination but a “substantial motivating factor/reason.” In this case, the judge omitted the “substantial” instruction even though the defense department implored him to do so.
“The instruction error cannot be considered harmless,” the judges ruled, according to The Hollywood Reporter. “Of central importance to the case was the weight given to discriminatory intent and whether that intent need only be of a mere motivating factor or a substantial factor. Given this central dispute, the failure to give the proper instruction regarding substantial factor cannot be considered harmless, and a new trial must be granted.”
Cochran says the executive producer of the show became upset when she told him she was pregnant with twins. “He was mad at me and it was hard to comprehend someone upset that I was having twins,” Cochran told ABC affiliate KABC-TV last November. “And then I would get questions, ‘How long are you going to work?’ ‘Are you going to work if you get really big?’”
Cochran claimed that the intimidation and abuse spread even to her co-workers who called her “wide load” and joked that the set might break underneath her because she was gaining pregnancy weight. Months after her maternity leave in 2010, Cochran tried to return to the job on the show but was turned down. “They ignored me, for probably about four months, trying to get a direct response about working,” she told KABC.
The new date for the trial has not yet been set.
SOURCE: KABC-TV, Hollywood Reporter, Associated Press
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
THE LAW: LIFE SENTENCE UPHELD FOR WAL-MART SHOVING DEATH
Although he was never charged with the death of 56-year-old Bruce Florence, both a jury of his peers and a Texas appeals court ruled that William Alan Kennedy, who pushed Wal-Mart employee Florence to the ground, inflicting fatal injuries, deserved a life sentence for his actions. Kennedy collided with Florence as he attempted to flee from a Fort Worth Wal-Mart carrying and dropping a TV he was trying to steal. Undeterred by the violent encounter or the broken TV set, Kennedy made his way over to a Target store, and successfully made off with a TV set there.
The encounter between Florence and Kennedy was caught on video tape and showed Kennedy shoving Florence and running him over to get out of the store. Florence suffered a skull fracture, brain bruise and bleeding, which might not have been life-threatening except that Florence had hepatitis and was on the waiting list for a liver transplant. In light of his medical condition, the shove from Kennedy that resulted in the injuries proved to be enough to cause his death and nine days later, Florence died from end-stage liver cirrhosis.
A jury convicted Kennedy, not of manslaughter or assault, but of aggravated theft. Kennedy pleaded guilty to stealing the TV from Target and the Tarrant County District Court sentenced him to serve life in prison. The court said in its ruling that the prosecutors didn’t have to prove that Florence was seriously injured, only that the way that Kennedy used his hands, body or the TV in such a way that could have seriously hurt Florence. In a split decision, a three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas affirmed the lower court decision.
"Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational jury could have combined the evidence from the video and the testimony of the witnesses, including that of the medical examiner, to conclude that appellant used a deadly weapon," Justice Lee Gabriel wrote for the majority. "We hold, therefore, that the evidence in this case is sufficient to sustain the jury's deadly-weapon finding."
The court rejected Kennedy’s petition that he had ineffective counsel in the first trial. The defendant had claimed that because his attorney argued he was guilty of felony theft he left the door open to have him convicted of aggravated assault and receiving a life sentence that was linked to Florence’s death. Indeed, Kennedy’s attorney seemed to have ceded Kennedy’s guilt when he made this statement to the jury: “And he is guilty today, there’s no doubt about that; guilty of felony theft. We can see that with the intent to steal. . . . He acquired that TV with intent to steal, just unsuccessful. That’s not a defense. He’s guilty of felony theft. He pled guilty of felony theft yesterday of the Target theft. So he’s not trying to get [off] Scott free here. He’s already got a felony theft yesterday, asking for another felony theft today.”
The court did not fault Kennedy’s lawyer for his strategy, but wrote that the majority opinion to uphold the verdict was based in part on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' ruling in Tyra v. State, "everything that causes death is a deadly weapon, no matter what its intended use."
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot argued about the definition of a deadly weapon. “Suppose a high school tennis player gets angry because he believes his opponent has been intentionally making bad calls, so the angry player throws a small athletic bag at his opponent, and unknown to our angry tennis player, the bag contains explosives that explode when they hit the other boy, killing him. Clearly our angry player has committed assault, but has he really used a deadly weapon? The question, then, is does the actor have to know or should he know that he is using a deadly weapon?”
SOURCE: Texas Courts Online, www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
POLITICS: WHISTLE BLOWER AND AMERICAN LEGION BLAST VET ADMIN
The leader of the nation's largest wartime veterans service organization is expressing "great concern" over allegations that the Department of Veterans Affairs has grossly mishandled the care of Gulf War Illness patients.
In testimony this week before the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, several witnesses claimed that VA has consistently failed to treat the multi-symptomatic disease known as Gulf War Syndrome, commonly referred to as Gulf War Illness (GWI). Also, Dr. Steven Coughlin, a former senior epidemiologist at the VA's Office of Public Health who ended his four year career with VA last December by resigning "because of serious ethical concerns," said the VA suppressed evidence of links between GWI and environmental hazards to which service members were exposed in southwest Asia. "If the studies produce results that do not support Office of Public Health's unwritten policy, they do not release them," Coughlin told subcommittee members.
"I am greatly concerned" said National Commander James E. Koutz of The American Legion Thursday. "If Dr. Coughlin's allegations are true, VA's conduct is absolutely unconscionable. Some veterans – those of the first Gulf War – have been suffering from this disease for as many as two decades. That the cause of this serious, painful and debilitating malady might have been purposely withheld from broad medical knowledge is beyond comprehension. With knowledge of the cause could have come a cure, perhaps long ago. A thorough investigation is demanded by The American Legion."
During a recent Legion conference, U.S. Army MAJ Michael Chagaris, a Fort Bragg company commander and registered nurse, told Legionnaires of his own investigations into GWI, from which he had suffered. His privately commissioned medical team, which included a VA doctor, determined that the disease was caused by a bacterium common in Iraq and Afghanistan and resistance to it was lowered or destroyed by exposure to insecticides and other chemicals employed by the military in those regions. Chagaris fully recovered from GWI after taking a combination of two antibiotics over a course of 18 months.
SOURCE: American Legion, Congressional testimony, Dr. Steven Coughlin
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 71st day of 2013. So far, 2,001 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 138 of those deaths.
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up:https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
Created from stories published March 4 - 8, 2013.
THE LAW: NY Couple Says “Legal System Has Failed Us”
Justice delayed is justice denied say a NY couple who are living with horrible polluted conditions through no fault of their own and that court after court have decided insurance companies are liable to pay for the couples’ damages, but delays and a mountain of red tape have not only kept them from being compensated, but have also drained all their personal resources to keep up with legal bills to continue the court battle.
After eight years of living with the foul stench of heating oil in the crawl space of their home, and after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees seeking justice, Lynn Eskenazi and Steve Kritzberg are still waiting on the courthouse steps to have their lives, home and peace of mind restored. Even though all involved parties signed a stipulation agreement a year ago, Eskenazi and Kritzberg claim that the insurance companies are still engaging in delaying tactics to avoid making payments.
In October 2005, Eskenazi and Kritzberg affirmed that the oil collecting in the crawl space of their home was coming from the property of their neighbors, Robert and Debra Mackoul, immediately to the east. From the time the oil was discovered in 2005, several soil-boring tests have established that there was no trace of oil on the west side of the Eskenazi/Kritzberg residence, only on the east side where it was migrating west from the Mackoul's property.
"Test after test by our environmental consultants, and by insurance testers, the New York State DEC, have confirmed that the oil is flowing through the ground water from east to west to our home," says Eskenazi. "Tests also have proven that the oil leak did not originate from our tank, which is on the west side of our house. New York State Navigation law makes it very clear that we are entitled to have our home and property restored to its original pre-spill condition, a remedy confirmed by earlier court hearings. But the legal system has failed us. After eight years, we are still being denied getting our property cleaned up, which state law and the courts have said we are entitled to."
To finance their legal battle against two insurance companies, Eskenazi and Kritzberg used all of their savings and their boys' college funds. Furthermore, the legal battle has cost Lynn's parents $625,000 from their retirement funds and an additional $500,000+ is still owed to her lawyers and environmental consultants. To top it off, they lost two cars to Hurricane Sandy. During times of heavy rains, the stench of fuel oil is so strong that Lynn, Steve and their children are sometimes forced to vacate their home and move in with family until their home becomes habitable again.
"You can see why Steve and I are so exasperated," says Eskenazi, "The courts have agreed our lives should be restored but seem incapable of making that agreement happen. If the courts cannot bring about final resolution, hopefully the Governor and/or Legislature can take action to end our eight years of horror. The legal system has failed us."
Eskenazi is hoping that the next hearing on March 7, 2013 in Nassau County Supreme Court, will finally be the court appearance that will put an end to their nightmare.
SOURCE: Market Watch, PRNewsWire, Lynn Eskenazi
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
POLITICS:OVEREXPOSED? POLL SAYS FLOTUS IS MORE POPULAR THAN EVER
The common Beltway wisdom is that Michelle Obama is wearing out her welcome with the American public. Appearing on The Oscar telecast sent her critics to their fainting couches. How dare she crash the party? Whether it is discussing the mid-life crisis she had when she got bangs or when she dances with Jimmy Fallon, the First Lady gets her fair share of press – too much, some say. And, while it has been previously widely reported that First Lady Michelle Obama is popular among Americans, it may come as more of a surprise to political pundits just how many feel she has a positive influence on her husband's decisions and was a positive factor in his 2012 re-election – according to a Harris Interactive Poll.
Regardless of personal feelings as to whether or not "great" is a description that can be applied to our 44th president, Michelle Obama is clearly an appealing figure, with roughly two-thirds (65 percent) of Americans indicating that she is doing either an "Excellent" or "Pretty good" job as first lady.
While combined positive ratings are similar to those seen for Laura Bush in September of 2006 (64 percent) and down slightly from her own ratings in June of 2009 (68 percent), Michelle Obama's 2013 "Excellent" ratings (35 percent) are up from Laura Bush's 2006 ratings (23 percent) and up from First Lady Obama's own 2009 ratings (28 percent).
First Lady Obama's combined “excellent” and “pretty good” ratings are significantly higher among women (69 percent) than men (61 percent).
Nearly two-thirds of political Independents (64 percent) rate the job First Lady Obama is doing as either “excellent” or “pretty good,” as do the vast majority (88 percent) of Democrats and one-third (33 percent) of Republicans.
Looking beyond the more symbolic post of First Lady, Michelle Obama is also seen as having a positive influence within the political sphere: seven in ten Americans (70 percent) believe First Lady Obama has either a very or somewhat good influence on the President's decisions (down somewhat from the 77 percent recorded in 2009).
Women (74 percent) are more likely to perceive her influence on the President's decisions as good than men (66 percent).
Roughly two-thirds of political Independents (66 percent) believe Michelle Obama has either a very or somewhat good influence on the President's decisions, as do nearly all (95 percent) Democrats and roughly four in ten (39 percent) Republicans.
Additionally, seven in ten Americans (71 percent) agree that First Lady Michelle Obama was a positive factor in her husband's re-election, with the majority across all political persuasions agreeing on this point (54 percent Republicans, 89 percent Democrats, 67 percent Independents).
Looking at other positive statements regarding the First Lady, nearly half of Americans agree that she is the best-dressed First Lady (47 percent) and that she is more popular than her husband (46 percent).
The perception of Michelle Obama as the best-dressed first lady is stronger among younger Americans (53 percent ages 18-34, 58 percent ages 35-44, 39 percent ages 45-54, 42 percent ages 55+) and among women (51 percent women, 43 percent men).
The first family lives a life of perpetual exposure and scrutiny, and these results back 2009 findings, showing Michelle Obama to be weathering the attention well. What's more, the perception of positively influencing presidential policy and her husband's 2012 presidential campaign indicates that all sides see her as holding an important position within Washington. Who knows what the future might hold for this continually popular figure? Will she follow another First Lady? A Senate run has already been suggested, if only speculatively so, by some. Or, will she create a charitable organization to continue championing her "Let's Move" campaign?
SOURCE: Harris Interactive
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
THE LAW: SCOTUS DECLINES HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY APPEAL
The U.S. Supreme Court turned down Blue Shield's request to overturn a ninth circuit ruling requiring health plans to cover residential treatment for eating disorders. In denying to hear the case, the Court let stand a ruling that the California Mental Health Parity Act requires health plans to provide coverage of "all medically necessary treatment" for "severe mental illnesses" under "the same financial terms as those applied to physical illnesses," even if the policy excludes residential treatment. The decision ends Jeanene Harlick's nearly eight-year struggle to obtain benefits for residential treatment for her eating disorder.
Jeanene Harlick has suffered from anorexia for more than 20 years. In 2006, her physicians recommended treatment at a facility qualified to treat eating disorders. Although Blue Shield agreed to pay for the treatment, after 10 days it denied coverage, saying the plan did not cover residential treatment even though the insurer agreed the treatment was medically necessary.
"Health plans should give all the reasons for a denial of benefits at once, rather than waiting years to inform policyholders of new reasons for the initial denial," said Harlick's lawyer Lisa Kantor from Kantor & Kantor. "Blue Shield never questioned the medical necessity of Harlick's treatment at the outset, but argued it had the right to do so after it became aware California law invalidated its policy language denying treatment. Under that theory, policyholders would be forced to wait years for recovery as insurers work through their list of reasons to deny coverage."
In July 2008, Kantor sued Blue Shield on Harlick's behalf, arguing, among other things, that Blue Shield's health plan violated the California Mental Health Parity Act. Blue Shield argued that it properly denied coverage under the terms of the plan, and the district court agreed. Harlick appealed, and the Ninth Circuit ruled in her favor.
Blue Shield requested a rehearing and a rehearing en banc. The California Department of Insurance filed a brief of amicus curiae (friend of the Court), opposing Blue Shield's requests and supporting Harlick's position. The Department of Managed Healthcare did not file a brief in the matter, despite its responsibility for regulating health care service plans in California.
On June 4, 2012, the Court denied the request for rehearing and rehearing en banc, withdrew its prior opinion of August 26, 2011, and issued a majority opinion by Judge William A. Fletcher with a dissenting opinion by Judge N.R. Smith. Blue Shield immediately filed another request for rehearing and rehearing en banc, which was denied by the Court. After that, Blue Shield petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case is California Physicians' Service dba Blue Shield of California v. Harlick, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-457.
SOURCE: www.californiainsurancelawyerblog.com, Kantor & Kantor LLP
{If you liked this report, you’ll love our monthly newsletter – and best of all, it’s FREE! Each issue is packed with news and features from the worlds of politics and law that you'll actually enjoy reading! We promise never to give your email to anyone, no matter how much they beg and plead. Just click on this Facebook link to safely sign up: https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lawyer-And-A-Politician-Walk-Into-A-Bar/408028852579515?sk=app_115462065200508 }
BAD FOR AMERICA
Today is the 64th day of 2013. So far, 1,871 people have been killed by guns.
Children under 18 years of age accounted for 131 of those deaths.
Mel's Thoughts: Which is worse at running a business: government or private industry? Compare bank failures, Enron, HP, World Com, Eastman Kodak, etc., to Fed spending which is greatly influenced by private sector lobbying. It’s at least a tie.
___________________
