Breen v. Caesars Palace

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that an employer or subrogee “would be unjustly enriched if it were permitted to assess its lien against the total proceeds of the settlement without bearing its share of litigation expenses”
• indicating that principles of equity, fairness, and justice should be considered when allocating litigation costs
• defining the scope of an employer’s (or an employer’s insurer’s) lien on the injured worker’s “total proceeds” as including the right to reimbursement from the worker’s recovery of damages for noneconomic losses
• affirming statutory right of worker’s compensation insurer or self-insured employer to a lien on the “total proceeds” of any recovery, but holding that insurer, in exercising the lien, must absorb a proportionate share of the litigation expenses that were incurred for the recovery
• employer’s subrogation interest in total proceeds of medical malpractice settlement included that portion of settlement proceeds attributable to noneconomic losses, notwithstanding that workers’ compensation act did not compensate employees for noneconomic damages
• declining to read statute literally in light of statutory scheme

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).