Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Michigan: U.S. Supreme Court won't consider WC racketeering lawsuit

The U.S. Supreme Court said it will not consider a lawsuit filed in Michigan that sought to determine whether employers, claims administrations, and workers' compensation carriers could be sued under federal racketeering laws for their questionable claims handling practices.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

The High Court's refusal sent the case back to a lower court for trial.

In late 2008, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer who allegedly colluded with its doctors and claims administrator to deny workers' comp claims by six employees may be targeted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act. The case, Brown v. Cassens Transport Co., was filed in 2004 by a group of truck drivers who submitted workers' comp claims. The plaintiffs alleged that Cassens Transport Co. which was self-insured for purposes of paying benefits under the Michigan Workers' Disability Compensation Act, conspired with Crawford & Co., a claims administrator, and Dr. Saul Margules, a physician who conducted independent medical examinations, to deny their claims.

Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Cassens and Crawford deliberately selected and paid unqualified doctors, including Margules, to give fraudulent medical opinions that would support the denial of workers' comp benefits, and that the defendants ignored other medical evidence in denying them benefits. The suit alleged that the defendants made fraudulent communications amongst themselves and to the plaintiffs by mail and wire in violation of the law, which served as the predicate acts for their RICO claims.

Read more at the WORKERSCOMP ForumTM homepage.

January 11, 2010

Copyright 2010© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.