Woman settles over brain damage causing accident, but Wal-Mart gets the money
This is one of the most despicable, inhumane stories I've seen about Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) in awhile, courtesy of (subscription required) the Wall Street Journal.
Basically, a woman was left with permanent brain damage at the age of 45 after an accident with a semi-trailer truck. She was recently awarded a $700,000 settlement but then her employer, Wal-Mart, sued her for the money to reimburse itself for the money it spent on her medical costs.
I'm not a lawyer. I don't know about the legality here, but think about this: this poor lady's husband has to work two jobs now, and she is left alone in a nursing home far more than he would like her to be. And it's all because Wal-Mart needed $700,000 to recoup what it spent on an employee's medical care. Wal-Mart made $11,284,000,000 in fiscal year 2007. This lady is spending time alone in a nursing home so the company could recoup $700,000.
At the very least, this is more horrible PR for Wal-Mart, and we shouldn't let them get away with it. Wal-Mart needs to learn that treating people badly is no way to boost the stock price.
Basically, a woman was left with permanent brain damage at the age of 45 after an accident with a semi-trailer truck. She was recently awarded a $700,000 settlement but then her employer, Wal-Mart, sued her for the money to reimburse itself for the money it spent on her medical costs.
I'm not a lawyer. I don't know about the legality here, but think about this: this poor lady's husband has to work two jobs now, and she is left alone in a nursing home far more than he would like her to be. And it's all because Wal-Mart needed $700,000 to recoup what it spent on an employee's medical care. Wal-Mart made $11,284,000,000 in fiscal year 2007. This lady is spending time alone in a nursing home so the company could recoup $700,000.
At the very least, this is more horrible PR for Wal-Mart, and we shouldn't let them get away with it. Wal-Mart needs to learn that treating people badly is no way to boost the stock price.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-20-2007 @ 3:25PM
TF said...
This is typical of what is going on in America. The rich get richer, the lower class fall deeper into dept. Where is their congress(person)? Too busy feeding at the trough of Corporate America? Congress along with that loser of a president has brought this country to it's knees.
11-20-2007 @ 3:26PM
Mark Starling said...
Why don't you complain about attorneys who represent plaintiffs. They typically take 40% of any recovery.
If an employee is hurt by a third party (non-employer) why should an employer's workers compensation insurer have to pay for the damages under the terms of the policy? Do we want to make employers responsible for all injuries to their employees notwithstanding when or how the injuries occured?
12-21-2007 @ 6:30PM
Heather Sweet said...
As an employee of Walmart, I'll tell you why my insurer should pay for my medical problems-- because that's what insurance is for!!.
When I'm injured, hurt, or god forbid debilitated I am going to need care. That costs money and every cent counts in a world where just getting a bandaid at the hospital costs over a month's salary for someone who works minimum wage.
What purpose is there to having insurance if it's not going to cover your medical costs? What right do they have to 'take back' what you settle in court? It's not their money. You have a fee taken from your paycheck, to pay for your medical costs. You paid for it. Therefore, you've bought the coverage. They've no right to just up and take everything (and then some) like they did to Mrs. Shanks. It's ridiculous and it needs to stop.
Anybody who says that "Well we shouldn't be responsible for one person's accident" needs to realize that one day it's going to be you in Mrs. Shanks shoes, staring down the barrel of an insurer's gun.
11-20-2007 @ 3:36PM
WS said...
Man, why don't we just cancel eveyone's health insurance and toss anyone who gets hurt onto the garbage heap, and use them for spare parts. If this attitude keeps up, this will be one miserable country to be living in.
11-20-2007 @ 4:55PM
Frank Tizzano said...
I do not believe this story that Wal-Mart sued her$700,000 . Can anyone verify this story.
11-20-2007 @ 11:36PM
YMH1214 said...
The Shanks settled in August 2002 for $900,000. After attorneys' fees and expenses, an irrevocable trust set up for Debbie Shank got $417,477 and her husband got $119,280, according to court documents.
Jim Shank has dreaded something like this since he got a letter two weeks after the accident, while his wife was still in intensive care, "clinging to life."
He recalls the letter saying he had to sign over any right to lawsuit proceeds or the health plan would not pay for his wife's care.
Is it fair that all Wal-Mart employees pay for one persons accident? Mr Shank signed over any proceeds which most insurances have that clause in them in you choose to sue. Even car insurance has that clause in it. You may take their help unless you choose to seek other help elsewhere.
11-20-2007 @ 11:38PM
Sachin said...
Here is the link to the article. Looks like subscription is not required: http://tinyurl.com/ysq5zn. Frank Tizzano: hope this link proves that this really happened! This is really terrible, but isn't it true that its just the way our law is written and that everyone is equal in the eyes of law? I wonder!
http://blogs.sdole.net/2007/11/healthcareless.html
11-21-2007 @ 1:21PM
mary miller said...
why didn't this womans attorney's advise her (or her husband ) not to sign anything until the courts settled the dispute? Either way, Wal-Mart comes out looking very greedy and cold. This doesn't suprise me- I have been treated poorly 90% of the time when I go there.
11-28-2007 @ 6:02PM
Nelly said...
WOW it is really nice to know that if something like this happens to myself,my family and friends that we would be left with NOTHING AT ALL. This poor woman will be like this for the rest of her life.Maybe they didnt have to give her 700,000 dollars but atleast something. People are so cold. Walmart makes that much money in one day! ONE DAY!!! Forget any papers that she signed, forget whatever anyone else is talking about to defend Walmart and anyone who had any say in sueing this lady.Whats right is right and whats wrong is wrong!!! This world will pay!
11-28-2007 @ 6:08PM
Corey Mondello said...
This is a disgrace.
American's need to take back their country.
The Founding Fathers, along with others, warned about large corporations having too much power.
This seems to be the case in this situation.
Thomas Jefferson on corporations: “I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”
"The rich and the powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes." ~ Andrew Jackson
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country ... Corporations have been
enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
~ Abraham Lincoln
"The masters of the Government of the United States are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United States."
~ Woodrow Wilson
Corey Mondello
Boston, Massachusetts
cpmondello@yahoo.com
www.CoreyMondello.com
11-28-07
11-30-2007 @ 9:54AM
kadie said...
Regardless if he signed anything, any employer whose employee was injured on the job, to where they can no longer hold down employment should be responsible for their healthcare. She was doing her job, when she was put into a nightmare, and now Walmart took that nightmare a step further and I will not ever step foot back into Wal mart no matter how good the prices are. If they care no more for their employees, What about us????? What if we were hurt at Walmarts hands? what would they do to us?????
11-30-2007 @ 12:03PM
Gr33ngurl said...
When I read this story last week, the thing I kept asking myself is: Why on earth would Walmart risk such bad PR and further fan the flame of anti-Walmart folks by doing this? are they really that hard up for $? or is it the "principal" of the situation.
From an economic standpoint, the negative costs of trying to recoup this actually has to outweigh any legal argument they could really make. I just don't get them sometimes. Why do they suck so bad at everything except cheap goods and treating everyone they work with (suppliers, employers, Chinese) so poorly?
12-27-2007 @ 4:26PM
linda kozero said...
The right of subrogation trumps humanity. Even if Walmart is self insured for the Worker Compensation, the contract covering the employee will still call out recovery from the party responsible. Had the couple not recovered, Walmart or its insuror would have had recourse to the driver and his insurance company. Our laws have taken the humanitarian choices out of our society, reducing us to legal formulas that enrich that profession and guarantee its existence. It is not for nothing that so many of our legislators are lawyers. The attorneys got almost half of the original settlement, how much did they get of the second? However, the bottom line is that the contracts are at fault, not Walmart.