[Abathar]

I thought this is what workman's comp was suppose to be for, she was on the job, lord knows if your a cop your put in positions other than what most people would consider normal. Does this mean if she climbed a fence and it broke hurting her she can sue the homeowner too?

[kbennkc]

Perhaps Workman’s comp versus home owners insurance company . Insurance snake lawyers make regular ambulance chasers look like public servants .

[Dianna]

I thought this is what workman's comp was suppose to be for, she was on the job, lord knows if your a cop your put in positions other than what most people would consider normal. Does this mean if she climbed a fence and it broke hurting her she can sue the homeowner too?

We might want to consider the possibility that workman's comp is refusing to pay unless this avenue is explored first.

This lawsuit seems so out of line, that this is the only reasonable explanation I can come up with.

[Joe 6-pack]

"I thought this is what workman's comp was suppose to be for..."

A worker's comp carrier can try to subrogate against a third party if there's a possibility of liability/negligence other than the employer. For example, if you're a carpenter working for a construction company, but the ladder you're climbing breaks because of faulty materials or construction, your employer's worker's comp carrier will go after the general liability carrier for the ladder manufacurer. I suspect that's what's going on here...Some municipalities, particularly the larger ones, are self-insured for either worker's comp, liability or both, and may be leaving the officer hanging out to dry with her medical bills.

Having said all that, I think suing the family is an unmitigated act of the highest sleaziness.