Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Pending Decision May Influence Measure of Medical Damages
Measuring the extent of medical damages, for a medical malpractice claim as for any other type of negligence claim, is an important part of any case. Normally, when a defendant causes harm that sends a plaintiff to a hospital or doctor, three different measures may be relevant to determining the defendant's liability ' the amount the plaintiff herself has paid for medical care, the amount the plaintiff's health insurance has paid on her behalf, and the amount a health care provider has billed as its “usual and customary” charge.
The first amount is not controversial because a plaintiff is, of course, entitled to be compensated for any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. The second amount, too, is usually not in dispute; it is generally agreed that a defendant is also liable for medical expenses the plaintiff did not pay, but which were instead paid by her health insurance carrier. That additional recovery is the result of the common-law collateral source rule, although many states have modified the rule by statute to reduce such recoveries. As stated by the California Supreme Court, the collateral source rule provides that “if an injured party receives some compensation for his injuries from a source wholly independent of the tortfeasor, such payment should not be deducted from the damages which the plaintiff would otherwise collect from the tortfeasor.” Helfend v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit Dist. (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1, 6.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.