Legal Opinion

Kaiman v. Mercy Midlands Medical & Dental Plan

Nebraska Court of Appeals

Decided May 19, 1992No. A-90-435PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Sievers, Chief Judge.

This appeal presents the first impression issue of whether a health care insurer who is reimbursed as the result of an injured employee’s successful workers’ compensation suit is obligated to pay attorney fees to the employee’s attorney.

This case comes to us after the district court for Douglas County sustained the demurrer of Mercy Midlands Medical and Dental Plan and its trustee (Mercy Midlands). In reviewing an order sustaining a demurrer, an appellate court accepts the truth of facts well pled and the factual and legal inferences which may reasonably be deduced from…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Quinn v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Lease Lights, Inc. v. Public Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. United Services Automobile Association v. HillsNebraska Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Yeiser v. DysartSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  5. State ex rel. Wright v. BarneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1937

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Lewis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Schweitzer v. American National Red CrossNebraska Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Kindred v. City of Omaha Employees' Retirement SystemNebraska Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Bailey v. Farmers Union Co-operative InsuranceNebraska Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. United States v. OlsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API