Texas county suing wife, children of fallen deputy

[radcen]

Thoughts?

Texas county suing wife, children of fallen deputy

Fort Bend County suing wife and children of fallen deputy | abc7chicago.com

 

[Chomsky]

Thoughts?

Terrible.

And another reason to have single-payer healthcare.

But why did the Deputy not have insurance through his job?

 

[clownboy]

Terrible.

And another reason to have single-payer healthcare.

But why did the Deputy not have insurance through his job?

Obamacare. We're all supposed to get our own now. The days of employer supplied insurance are dying.

 

[Mr Person]

Thoughts?

This seems disgusting.


Morality aside, I'm not even seeing any logic to this. Somebody else was "deemed liable" for the accident, not the officer. So what are they doing suing the plaintiff, rather than the defendant, in that prior suit? I'd have thought they'd seek to recoup medical expenses from the person whose fault it was.

 

[Mr Person]

But why did the Deputy not have insurance through his job?

According to the article "Fort Bend County is self-insured." That adds yet another layer of WTF to this mess. An officer is killed in the line of duty and his self-insured employer pays bills? Then sues him?

What exactly is the point of self-insurance if the self-insured employer sues its insureds to recoup medical expenses?

 

[Moot]

The attorney representing the Norsworthy's says there was a statute of limitations which prohibits the county from filing the suit against the family. That expired after two years.

If the county knew that their statute of limitations had run out then filing at a lawsuit seems like pretty vindictive thing to do. Shame on them.

 

[radcen]

This seems disgusting.

Morality aside, I'm not even seeing any logic to this. Somebody else was "deemed liable" for the accident, not the officer. So what are they doing suing the plaintiff, rather than the defendant, in that prior suit? I'd have thought they'd seek to recoup medical expenses from the person whose fault it was.

My thoughts, as well. My sense is that they are not pursuing the defendant because the defendant has no money or assets. The plaintiffs, as a result of their claim being settled, do. Deep pockets.

According to the article "Fort Bend County is self-insured." That adds yet another layer of WTF to this mess. An officer is killed in the line of duty and his self-insured employer pays bills? Then sues him?

What exactly is the point of self-insurance if the self-insured sues its insureds to recoup medical expenses?

I hope this gets thrown out. Unfortunately, they will still spend a lot of money defending.

 

[Winchester]

Thoughts?

Well, the county paid for bills that were later reimbursed by a third party responsible for the accident... so yeah they should be repaid. WTH should the family get the expenses paid by the county and the third party?

 

[Thoreau72]

Thoughts?

This is when you can really relate to Shakespeare's idea to kill all the lawyers tonight.

Wow, what a low blow by the county, to not tell them before the settlement.

 

[Tonawanda]

It certainly sounds unfair and even unethical, but if I understand correctly, it could be right.

It sounds like subrogation. Subrogation is defined as a legal right that allows one party (in this case the county) to make a payment that is actually owed by another party (e.g., the other driver’s insurance company) and then collect the money from the party that owes the debt after the fact.

It appears that the county paid medical bills, on behalf of the family, that the county was not responsible for, and they are entitled to the payment from the insurance company of the driver who was at fault. In accidents and workers comp cases, the county usually would have filled a claim and got the payment directly from the insurance company.

It sounds like a big screw up, and the county has now realized and decided to go after the money. If the family's settlement included hospital bills and the family didn't pay them, the county may have an appropriate legal claim.

 

[Thoreau72]

It certainly sounds unfair and even unethical, but if I understand correctly, it could be right.

It sounds like subrogation. Subrogation is defined as a legal right that allows one party (in this case the county) to make a payment that is actually owed by another party (e.g., the other driver’s insurance company) and then collect the money from the party that owes the debt after the fact.

It appears that the county paid medical bills, on behalf of the family, that the county was not responsible for, and they are entitled to the payment from the insurance company of the driver who was at fault. In accidents and workers comp cases, the county usually would have filled a claim and got the payment directly from the insurance company.

It sounds like a big screw up, and the county has now realized and decided to go after the money. If the family's settlement included hospital bills and the family didn't pay them, the county may have an appropriate legal claim.

I'll bet you are quite right on that subrogation issue. To me it's nonsensical, but I don't play the insurance game too much.

 

[radcen]

Well, the county paid for bills that were later reimbursed by a third party responsible for the accident... so yeah they should be repaid. WTH should the family get the expenses paid by the county and the third party?

It certainly sounds unfair and even unethical, but if I understand correctly, it could be right.

It sounds like subrogation. Subrogation is defined as a legal right that allows one party (in this case the county) to make a payment that is actually owed by another party (e.g., the other driver’s insurance company) and then collect the money from the party that owes the debt after the fact.

It appears that the county paid medical bills, on behalf of the family, that the county was not responsible for, and they are entitled to the payment from the insurance company of the driver who was at fault. In accidents and workers comp cases, the county usually would have filled a claim and got the payment directly from the insurance company.

It sounds like a big screw up, and the county has now realized and decided to go after the money. If the family's settlement included hospital bills and the family didn't pay them, the county may have an appropriate legal claim.

If that's the case, then I'm kind of angry at the media. I saw three sources, and none of them mentioned this possibility. I would suspect that the sheriff's office would have mentioned it in their statements.

 

[ludin]

if the statue of limitations has run out then this is useless.
the county should have filed a claim against the other persons insurance.

if the county did pay the medical bills then they are entitled to recovery of costs according to the insurance payment.
they just don't get to go it was 300k pay us the full amount.

 

[Mr Person]

This is when you can really relate to Shakespeare's idea to kill all the lawyers tonight.

This is when lawyers get offended.

Come on, now. The lawyer's duty is to do everything in his client's interest that is legal and ethical (professionally ethical...not ethical in the sense of whether one deems it moral).

Part of the reason we have so much "freedom" is because of that.




Tangent: do we condemn a physician who saves a criminal's life in surgery? Must we not excuse him in light of the overriding importance of his oath to do no harm?

Besides, if a case is truly frivolous, the lawyer can/will get fined and/or disciplined.

 

[Mr Person]

It certainly sounds unfair and even unethical, but if I understand correctly, it could be right.

It sounds like subrogation. Subrogation is defined as a legal right that allows one party (in this case the county) to make a payment that is actually owed by another party (e.g., the other driver’s insurance company) and then collect the money from the party that owes the debt after the fact.

It appears that the county paid medical bills, on behalf of the family, that the county was not responsible for, and they are entitled to the payment from the insurance company of the driver who was at fault. In accidents and workers comp cases, the county usually would have filled a claim and got the payment directly from the insurance company.

It sounds like a big screw up, and the county has now realized and decided to go after the money. If the family's settlement included hospital bills and the family didn't pay them, the county may have an appropriate legal claim.

It's not my area and that may be right....but man... that is ugly as far as morals go, imo.

 

[winston53660]

It certainly sounds unfair and even unethical, but if I understand correctly, it could be right.

It sounds like subrogation. Subrogation is defined as a legal right that allows one party (in this case the county) to make a payment that is actually owed by another party (e.g., the other driver’s insurance company) and then collect the money from the party that owes the debt after the fact.

It appears that the county paid medical bills, on behalf of the family, that the county was not responsible for, and they are entitled to the payment from the insurance company of the driver who was at fault. In accidents and workers comp cases, the county usually would have filled a claim and got the payment directly from the insurance company.

It sounds like a big screw up, and the county has now realized and decided to go after the money. If the family's settlement included hospital bills and the family didn't pay them, the county may have an appropriate legal claim.

Does it make any impact if the county is self insured?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Thoughts?

lost wages

What the **** is the county even suing them FOR? LOST WAGES - what THEIR lost wages?

That would be like a soldier being killed in the line of duty and the military suing the family after insurance paid the soldier's family . . . ? See - it makes NO sense.

Fort Bend county needs to get bent. I'm pretty ****ing sure the taxpayers don't give a flying ****. :roll: You know a country's gone to total **** when they start suing the family when their on-duty demands caused a death.

 

[Tonawanda]

Does it make any impact if the county is self insured?

Probably not, but I don't know about Texas insurance law. Self insurance is a form of insurance. And, even if the county or the deputy had medical insurance, it's still likely that those companies would also have filed a claim against the insurance company of the driver.

 

[Tonawanda]

What the **** is the county even suing them FOR? LOST WAGES - what THEIR lost wages

I agree, it doesn't seem to make any sense. They are possibly grasping at straws because of some payments contractually owed to the family. No idea?

 

[molten_dragon]

I don't even understand what the county is suing for.

 

[blackjack50]

Thoughts?

What is MOST despicable about this is that someone actually decided to take this to court. They can't pretend it is a clerical error, or some kind of "accident." Someone decided they are entitled some additional coin

I wonder if they can sue the county for mental anguish?

 

[notquiteright]

Obamacare. We're all supposed to get our own now. The days of employer supplied insurance are dying.

Awww there ya go again... First several counties/cities in Texas CHOSE to self insure long before the ACA. Medical and social security. The ACA doesn't change gubmint workers coverage responsibilities. NO WHERE does the ACA say Law Enforcement Officers must buy from the Exchange... :doh

But the days of employer supplied insurance was ending long before the ACA along with pensions... eace

 

[notquiteright]

What is MOST despicable about this is that someone actually decided to take this to court. They can't pretend it is a clerical error, or some kind of "accident." Someone decided they are entitled some additional coin. I wonder if they can sue the county for mental anguish?

Well the error was deciding to go it alone when it comes to insurance. The County includes a local judge that was quoted in the article. Some governments in Texas chose to self insure in medical coverage and self pension (instead of paying into social security). They run the risk of a high payout collapsing their system. They are almost forced to sue to recover costs, what I find ignorant, (beyond self funding at the county level), is the county didn't sue the same folks the fallen Officer's family did. A far smarter move would be to sue on behalf of the family and share in the award.

Wasn't smart to self fund, and not smart to sue the family of a fallen county Officer... I guess they are just not very smart all the way 'round... eace

 

[longview]

They have started a petition to get the county to drop the lawsuit.
The attorney for the Norsworthy family says the statute of limitations for the county to sue expired after two years. Deputy Norsworthy was killed five years ago.
I tend to agree, the county had a right to sue the person who caused the accident, but chose not to.
Only when the family won a settlement, 6 years later, does the county then say the money is theirs.
Petition calls for Fort Bend Co. to drop lawsuit against fallen deputy's family | abc13.com

 

[year2late]

Obamacare. We're all supposed to get our own now. The days of employer supplied insurance are dying.

I believe he did have insurance. They were self insured....no need to go to an exchange, as long as the insurance complies with the ACA insurance enquirments.