The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Dicarlo v. Suffolk Construction Company determined that Workers Compensation Insurance Companies in Massachusetts were barred from placing a lien on pain and suffering claims of victims. Insurance companies were also banned from placing liens on 3rd party negligence claims of injured victims. This ruling in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dealt a significant blow to big insurance and their heavy handed and dilatory claims tactics. The MA top court reasoned that, “Examining the statute’s use of the term ‘injury,’ the court decided that the legislature could not have intended an expansive use of the term.
TOP MA Court slaps down big insurance in comp. decision
The amount of the ‘injury’ that an insurer could recoup would be limited to that “amount for which the insurer paid compensation… Since a worker’s compensation insurer does not compensate for pain and suffering, it likewise cannot be reimbursed from an amount characterized as such.”
Massachusetts Workers compensation lawyers are aware of insurance heavy handed and greedy tactics
It is common knowledge in legal circles of top Rhode Island personal injury lawyers and the best Massachusetts car accident attorneys that indemnity companies are “in it to win it.” Winning for insurance companies is maximizing shareholder value. Maximizing shareholder value means that insurance companies engage in delay, deny, denigrate (the victim) and litigate claims tactics. Big insurance has been plagued by a long history of bad faith, hardball litigation tactics and borderline quasi corrupt actions.
The law of subrogation – “the clawback”
Workers compensation Insurance companies in Mass. are entitled by statute to seek “subrogation” for workers comp. damages they tendered to the injured worker. According to the Insurance Journal “If an employee wins damages from a third party, the employee’s workers’ comp insurer is statutorily entitled to a lien on the recovery for the amount that the insurer paid to the employee in benefits.” Subrogation and workers compensation lien issues typically occur in the following types of accidents:
- third party Rhode Island truck accident case when a trucker employee is injured during the course of employment by a motorist driving a different car or motor vehicle
- a construction accident involving a defective machinery or tools and a product liability cause of action
- a delivery person employee who is injured by another car motorist or tucker
It is only an “outlay’ to big insurance- the dehumanization of the victim
According to the American Insurance Association discussed the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision, “the court’s decision essentially reduces the pool of funds from which a workers’ compensation insurer can recoup its outlay” Id. This quote unquote “outlay” is no actually an outlay! Worker’s compensation payment allow seriously injured workers, while unable to work, to pay their rent, put food on the table and pay their medical bills. Why should an insurance company be allowed to recoup funds it paid to injured workers for pain and suffering?
At Slepkowlaw we understand why an insurance company may feel entitled to a subjugation lien against a financial recovery for lost wages or medical bills that an injured victim obtain against a third-party tortfeasor. Lost wage subjugation would be for an insurance company to recover reimbursement for lost wages and medical bills provided by the comp. insurer. An insurance lien on lost wages means the victim does not get paid twice. Big insurance wants more than insuring that victims do not get double paid. Workers’ compensation insurance companies want to claw back the compensation paid to injured workers for their loss of enjoyment of life, pain and suffering, disability, scarring and disfigurement awards against third parties. SAY IT Ain’t SO!
TOP MA Court slaps down big insurance
The pertinent case concerning workers compensation liens on pain in Massachusetts is: Dicarlo v. Suffolk CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., & others; PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS OF CONNECTICUT, INC., third-party defendant. BERNARD J. MARTIN & another vs. ANGELINI PLASTERING, INC., & others. 473 Mass. 624. The idea that an insurance company is allowed to recoup funds it paid to injured workers for pain and suffering from third party claims is ridiculous! Worker’s compensation statutes typically exclude workers from obtaining any insurance funds to compensate for pain and suffering. Why should an insurance company be allowed to claw back funds paid to victims for their suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium, scarring and disfigurement?
MA workers comp. subrogation law
“Section 15. Where the injury for which compensation is payable was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability in some person other than the insured to pay damages in respect thereof, the employee shall be entitled, without election, to the compensation and other benefits provided under this chapter. Either the employee or insurer may proceed to enforce the liability of such person, but the insurer may not do so unless compensation has been paid in accordance with sections seven, eight, ten A, eleven C, twelve or nineteen nor until seven months following the date of such injury. The sum recovered shall be for the benefit of the insurer, unless such sum is greater than that paid by it to the employee, in which event the excess shall be retained by or paid to the employee. ” PART IADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT TITLE XXI LABOR AND INDUSTRIES CHAPTER 152 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Section 15 Liability of person other than insured MGL c. 152, Sec. 15
MA workers compensation lawyer
The Dicarlo case was a construction accident, personal injury case in Massachusetts. “DiCarlo, who suffered serious injuries to his back in 2004 while working at a construction site, received more than $281,000 in workers’ comp benefits for medical expenses and lost wages. DiCarlo and his wife then sued third parties including the construction site owner and the contractor managing that site. It resulted in a settlement of $100,000, with 35 percent of the settlement proposed to be allocated to DiCarlo’s pain and suffering and be exempt from the insurer’s lien.” Id.
Rhode Island Law- workers comp.
Similarly, in Rhode Island, “pain and suffering … is not compensable under the state workers’ compensation law.” Benders v. Ed of Governors for Higher Educ., 636 A.2d 1313, 1315 (R.I. 1994). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND FRANK A. VELLUCCI, Plaintiff, v. CHAD MILLER, MTLS INTERNATIONAL, INC., and LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
The issue presented in the Vellucci, RI workers compensation claim was: “The issue presented is whether (i) Mr. Vellucci is required to reimburse the workers’ compensation carrier the full amount of the recent settlement in his third-party lawsuit; or (ii) Mr. Vellucci is allowed to show that a portion of that settlement is for damages, i.e., pain and suffering, not included in the workers’ compensation payment he received from Ohio Casualty and therefore does not need to be reimbursed.” Id. The operable statute states: “The employee, in recovering damages either by judgment or settlement from the person so liable to pay damages, shall reimburse the person by whom the compensation was paid to the extent o(the compensation paid as of the date of the judgment or settlement and the receipt of those damages by the employee shall not bar future compensation.” R.I. Gen. Laws§ 28-35-58.
The Velucci court ruled, “Certainly the workers’ compensation carrier is not entitled to reimbursement for money paid to Mr. Vellucci for which it did not make a corresponding workers’ compensation payment.” THE RI court reasoned, “Here, the word “reimburse” is defined by Black’s Law Dictionary as “[t]o pay back, to make restoration, to repay that expended; to indemnify, or make whole.” Liberty Lincoln-Mercury v. Ford Motor Co., 134 F.3d 557, 566 (3d Cir. 1998) (emphasis added) (quoting BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 1287 (6th ed.l990)). “Clearly, the word ‘reimburse’ signifies a re payment for money already [paid].” US. ex rel. Humphrey v. Franklin-Williamson Human Servs., Inc., 189 F.Supp.2d 862, 871 (S.D.Ill. 2002). Reimbursement therefore is limited to what has been expended or paid. One cannot be reimbursed for something that it did not pay.” FRANK A. VELLUCCI, Plaintiff, v. CHAD MILLER, MTLS INTERNATIONAL, INC., and LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants.
This construction accident article and workers compensation article was authored by a construction accident lawyer in RI. One of the most dangerous occupations in Rhode Island and Massachusetts is construction. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “4,679 workers were killed on the job in 2014 with an average of 13 deaths per day.” The “fatal four” for deaths in the construction industry are “Falls, Electrocutions, Struck by Object, Caught-in/between.” In 2012, there were, “41-60 deaths in California and 105 deaths in Texas”. OSHA also reports that “One in ten construction workers are injured every year.” Id. Article by a Construction accident lawyer in RI.
If you were injured in a work-related accident, please call a RI construction accident lawyer or a workers comp. attorney in Rhode Island.
OSHA injury report
Even though numerous safety measures have been taken, these figures reflect the dangers of construction work. Injury or death has serious consequences for a worker and their family. Loss of income, pain and suffering, medical bills and other expenses can be devastating if action is not taken right away. Immediately consulting a RI construction accident lawyer, who is experienced in this kind of catastrophe, is essential if you are to receive the protection and compensation you deserve. Such a RI personal injury attorney will file the required OSHA report detailing all events that led up to the injury. In addition, their investigator will investigate the accident and present a complete report with details regarding condition of the site and what led up to the incident.
Construction accident lawyer RI
Companies are required to have protection for their workers such as Workman’s Compensation Insurance and other policies. Having a Providence construction accident attorney who can deal with these companies will allow you to concentrate on getting well. Massachusetts work site accident attorneys who are familiar with this type of case do not charge a consultation fee. Rather they will file required papers and represent you in court, if necessary, with no immediate out of pocket expense. They will be paid in the final settlement.
Workers Compensation in Rhode Island specialized field (worker’s comp)
The area of worker’s injuries is a specialized field. It requires extensive training and a full knowledge of all areas of the law regarding on-the job safety requirements. A Rhode Island workers compensation attorney with this training will immediately know what steps to take to assure that you receive just compensation not only for expenses but also for pain and suffering as well. Many states have a limited period in which to file a worker’s injury claim. This makes it essential to have someone on your side that is familiar with all claim requirements and is prepared to defend your rights when an insurer tries to deny or reduce your medical bills and other expenses.