No Fee Guarantee
Hablamos Español

Are Medical Bills Admissible At Trial When The Plaintiff Isn’t Claiming Medical Expenses??

Personal Accident Attorney Indianapolis Indiana

The legal community in Indiana, specifically those involved in both sides of personal injury cases, has been enthralled in a lively debate concerning whether Defendants should be able to admit Plaintiff’s medical bills when the Plaintiff him/herself isn’t claiming medical expenses as part of their damages. Of course, this debate didn’t arise out of thin air. It’s another repercussion of the infamous Stanley v. Walker case, which allowed defendants to introduce the reduced amounts paid for medical bills after health insurance discounts were applied, despite the collateral source statute clearly stating such payments couldn’t be introduced. As a result, Plaintiffs began removing the claim of medical expenses from cases where the paid amount of the medical bills was low, despite the injuries being significant in order to allow the jury to decide the case based on the injuries, as opposed to deciding it based on the amount of the paid medical. Now Defendants are attempting to introduce the medical bills at trial, despite them not being claimed as damages by the Plaintiff, in order to trick juries into focusing on the amount of the bills instead of the extent of the Plaintiff’s injuries.

In a recent article published in The Indiana Lawyer DTCI (Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana) attorneys argued the medical bills are or should be admissible in these situations. The article even went as far as to say they’re being used as an anchor, to bring the jury’s valuation of the claim down. The article cites case law from other states, where the courts determined the bills to be relevant because they helped the jury determine the seriousness and extent of the Plaintiff’s injuries. The issues with this line of reasoning are pointed out in a letter to the editor written by an ITLA (Indiana Trial Lawyers Association) member, Scott Faultless.

Scott began his rebuttal by analyzing the introduction of medical expenses in cases like this based on the Indiana Rules of Evidence 401, 402, and 403. His conclusion was, “[e]vidence of medical cost is irrelevant because it does not make the pain and suffering and general damages flowing from the injuries any more or less probable than it would be without the evidence of the cost.” He goes on to state Model Jury Instruction 703 directs jurors to consider the listed elements of damages in deciding the amount of money they award. Medical expenses aren’t listed as one of the elements they consider when they aren’t claimed, so they’re irrelevant as an element of damages. Further, the 7th circuit has already decided this in Varhol v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, 909 F.2d 1557 (7th Cir. 1990). There a Plaintiff tried to introduce the medical bills in a case where he couldn’t recover them. The judge refused to allow them to be admitted and the court of appeals unanimously upheld the decision. The rational was that, “since Varhol could not recover the expenses reflected in those bills, the amounts of those expenses bore little, if any, relevance to this case.” The article goes on to examine a Pennsylvania case that examines the issue and the excerpt was so profound I thought it would be important to include here as well:

“… (T)here is no logical or experiential correlation between the monetary value of medical services required to treat a given injury and the quantum of pain and suffering endured as a result of that injury. First, the mere dollar amount assigned to medical services masks the difference in severity between various types of injuries. A very painful injury may be untreatable, or, on the other hand, may require simpler and less costly treatment than a less painful one. The same disparity in treatment may exist between different but equally painful injuries. Second, given identical injuries, the method or extent of treatment sought by the patient or prescribed by the physician may vary from patient to patient and from physician to physician. Third, even where injury and treatment are identical, the reasonable value of that treatment may vary considerably depending upon the medical facility and community in which care is provided and the rates of physicians and other health care personnel involved. Finally, even given identical injuries, treatment and cost, the fact remains that pain is subjective and varies from individual to individual.”

Martin v. Soblotney, 502 Pa. 418, 466 A.2d 1002, 1025 (1983). That quote accurately sums up our opinions on the issue. If we represent a client and determine that it’s in our client’s best interest to drop any claim for medical expenses because ntroducing his medical bills may unfairly “anchor” the jury’s valuation of the case, then that’s our client’s right. We have clients who are permanently injured who will suffer for the rest of their lives, but had limited treatment because there was nothing that could be done. Attempting to downplay the significant, lifelong impacts of such injuries by introducing the minimal medical bills to anchor the jury’s valuation is just another way for insurance companies to undermine the legitimate injury claims.

Contact Us For a Free Consultation Fill out the form below to receive a free and confidential initial consultation.

FAQs
Our Fees

It cost $0 up front to hire our office. We work on a contingency fee basis, which means you only pay us if we settle your case or obtain a verdict on your behalf.

If we’re unable to obtain a settlement of verdict for you we eat the costs we’ve advanced to litigate your case, which includes costs for ordering medical records, filing your case, hiring experts, deposing witnesses, and many other things.

If we do settle your case or obtain a verdict for you our standard rate is 33% of the settlement or verdict, plus reimbursement for the expense we’ve previously advanced. Our fee never increases like some personal injury attorneys, even if we have to take your case to trial.

Our Fees

It cost $0 up front to hire our office. We work on a contingency fee basis, which means you only pay us if we settle your case or obtain a verdict on your behalf.

If we’re unable to obtain a settlement of verdict for you we eat the costs we’ve advanced to litigate your case, which includes costs for ordering medical records, filing your case, hiring experts, deposing witnesses, and many other things.

If we do settle your case or obtain a verdict for you our standard rate is 33% of the settlement or verdict, plus reimbursement for the expense we’ve previously advanced. Our fee never increases like some personal injury attorneys, even if we have to take your case to trial.

Case Worth

As a victim, establishing damages, negotiating with the insurance company, or filing a lawsuit can be daunting and next to impossible without the assistance of an experienced lawyer. As a result, if you have been hurt in an accident, it is important that you contact an attorney as soon as possible to help you recover the compensation to which you are entitled under Indiana law.

Why Hire?

Choosing an attorney that has experience dealing with personal injury law is important to protect your legal rights. If you are trying to recover damages from a business or other type of organization, you can bet that they are going to have a legal team on their side.

Medical Bills

If you were injured by an accident you may be struggling to determine who is responsible for paying your medical bills and holding them accountable. Speak to an experienced personal injury lawyer at The Law Office of William W. Hurst and learn if we may be able to help.

Recovery

After you have been injured, you are entitled to compensation. The type and amount of compensation depends on the injury, bills, the cause of the injury, negligence/bad faith of the defendant, etc. The attorney you retain can also heavy influence your recovery through knowledge, experience, and dedication. Legal terms and phrases can be confusing even after you retain an attorney. If you have been injured, you may wonder how much your case is worth or what your “damages” are. The worse the injuries, the higher the value of the case and the greater need for an experienced attorney