cmonfils | March 7, 2011
www.subrogation.org
NASP testifies in South Dakota: Committee Rejects HB 1184
South Dakota’s House Bill 1184 was voted down in the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 24, 2011 by a 4-3 vote. Daran Kiefer, NASP’s Vice President, and Kammy Poff, NASP’s Amicus Chair, testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday on behalf of NASP as to the impact the bill would have on the subrogation industry and consumers. John Foster with State Farm and past President of NASP, also testified on behalf of his company as to the detrimental impact of the bill. NASP was quoted by the Associated Press in opposition to this bill. The article can be found HERE. (more…)
Category: Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Workers' Compensation |
No Comments »
Tags:
cmonfils | February 23, 2011
www.subrogation.org
Illinois Senate Bill 0152
The Illinois Senate has again introduced a bill requiring all insurance companies to submit automobile property damage claims (liability and damage issues only) to Inter-Company Arbitration. The parties may agree to use an alternate forum. The bill was introduced on February 8, 2011.
The Amicus Committee will monitor this bill and keep you apprised of the bill’s progress.
Kammy Poff Amicus Committee Co-Chair
Joe Willis StateNet Subcommittee Chair
Category: Illinois |
No Comments »
Tags:
Adam V. Russo | November 2, 2010
Sent from Daran Kiefer, Esq. of NASP, www.subrogation.org
The Chicago Bar Association is following the footsteps of the Ohio Bar as its Insurance Law Committee votes today at 1:00 P.M. Central Time whether to support a bill to limit health and medical payments subrogation rights in Illinois. This proposed change has been recommended by the Civil Practice Committee and is pending review by the Insurance Law Committee today. The Chicago Bar Association Legislative Liaison urged the committee members to vote against recommending the bill. (more…)
Category: Illinois, Subrogation |
No Comments »
Tags:
Adam V. Russo | July 9, 2010
This year’s lone felony/intoxication case raises an interesting question: when is driving under the influence a felony? In Kay-Woods v. Minnesota Life Insurance Co.,13 the insured died in a single-vehicle accident while driving with a revoked license and under the influence of alcohol and cocaine. The policy provided that benefits would not be paid if the death resulted from or was caused directly by commission of a felony. Although the spouse argued the cause of the revoked license was a previous reckless driving conviction, the evidence showed this same reckless driving conviction extended an earlier DUI license revocation. Under Illinois Vehicle Code, driving under the influence of alcohol was a Class felony; therefore, the district court ruled that the felony exclusion applied.
Category: Exclusion, Illinois, Summary Plan Description |
No Comments »
Tags:
Adam V. Russo | February 23, 2010
Illinois. The Illinois Supreme Court has struck down a medical malpractice law enacted in 2005 that limited monetary damages for pain and suffering to $1 million from hospitals and $500,000 from doctors. The court said the law violates the state’s separation-of-powers clause between the branches of government by allowing lawmakers to interfere with a jury’s right to determine damages. According to the American Medical Association, courts in 16 states have upheld these types of laws, while those in 11 states have overturned them. For more information, visit http://www.state.il.us/court/.
Category: Health Care Legislation, Illinois |
No Comments »
Tags:
Adam V. Russo | August 15, 2008
ERISA preempted an Illinois state law outlawing any claim on a workers’ compensation award, because the law related to benefits plans regulated by ERISA, a federal trial court decided. As a result, an employer may seek reimbursement of group health plan funds from workers’ compensation awards. The health plan paid the expenses before a determination was made that the claims were work related. The court determined that the settlements included reimbursement for health expenses that were paid by the plan. At least one of the awards was worded to assert that it was not a payment for health benefits, but the judge said that was an effort to stop a recovery attempt. (more…)
Category: 7th, ERISA, Illinois, Preemption |
1 Comment »
Tags:
