What Is the Collateral Source Rule in Florida

For years, free or low-cost services like Medicare and Medicaid were out of the question for the collateral source rule. The reason for this exception was that these government benefits are programs that cost the claimant little (or not at all). Deductions from the total amount of damages awarded to an injured party are limited to payments made by a company that meets the legal definition of a guarantee source. Paragraph 768.76(2)(a) classifies deductible warranty payments into four broad categories: We will always seek full and fair compensation for your losses, whether or not you have received compensation from a third-party warranty source. We have been proud to serve Floridians for decades and represent clients in all areas of Pensacola. Contact us by phone at 850-444-4878 or fill out our online contact form to schedule a free case assessment today! The issues before the Alaskan Supreme Court were whether the evidence should be limited to the amount paid, or whether the amount charged was relevant to the plaintiff`s assessment of the plaintiff`s harm, and whether the difference in amounts constituted an advantage of a security source. The court ruled that the amount initially charged was relevant as evidence of the value of the medical services. The court considered different approaches and ruled that the evidence of the amount charged was relevant. «} }, { «@type»: «Question», «Name»: «Are there exceptions to the collateral source rule in Florida?», «AcceptedAnswer»: { «@type»: «Answer», «text»: «For years, free or low-cost benefits such as Medicare and Medicaid were not eligible for the collateral source rule. The reason for this exception was that these state benefits are programs that cost the plaintiff little (or no).nnHow a defendant could submit evidence of medicare and medicaid payments to reduce the damages awarded by a plaintiff. However, a recent Florida Supreme Court decision complicated the state`s approach to this rule.

And the result is not favorable to the accused. Thus, a defendant could provide proof of Medicare and Medicaid payments to reduce the damages awarded by a plaintiff. However, a recent Florida Supreme Court decision complicated the state`s approach to this rule. And the result is not favorable to the accused. Contact a West Palm Beach personal injury lawyer at Pendas Law Firm today for a free consultation if you`ve been injured due to someone else`s negligence. Our experienced lawyers will help you recover the compensation to which you are entitled, whether or not you have also received compensation from a secondary source. In a personal injury claim, the plaintiff lists the financial losses it suffered as a result of the defendant`s negligence, including past and future medical expenses, as well as past and future income losses. The source of guarantee rule states that information about how the plaintiff could cover these losses other than by receiving compensation from the defendant is not admissible in court. The reasoning is that the lawsuit is about the defendant`s liabilities, not the amount of money left to the plaintiff after the accidental losses. floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2015/sc13-1768.pdf damage is exactly what it looks like: an amount to compensate the victim for their loss.

Punitive damages are also exactly what it looks like: an amount to punish the offender for their behavior. Unfortunately, this can complicate the process of compensating victims, especially when it comes to health care costs. To ensure plaintiffs don`t suffer, Florida courts enforce the collateral source rule. Here`s how Florida`s collateral source rule works and how Emmanuel Sheppard & Condon`s personal injury team can help you get full and fair compensation after an accident. Below is some basic information about Florida`s collateral source rule and how it might apply to your personal injury case. The source of coverage rule states that a defendant is liable for the total amount of damage calculated, even if the plaintiff`s insurance policy originally covered some of these losses. The idea behind this rule is not to punish complainants who use their own resources to support recovery. The courts will not allow proof of these resources to reduce the plaintiff`s financial compensation. Therefore, under Florida law, there is little or no defense to present or receive evidence of payments that claimants have received from other sources. Of course, this will potentially lead to a stroke of luck for the plaintiffs.

Obviously, an applicant who receives a reduction in their medical bills based on their insurance coverage will receive a significant stroke of luck. A jury may not receive evidence or information that would allow for a reduction in the recognition of these likely future reductions, a point that must be taken into account when evaluating a possible reward for future medical expenses. The collateral source rule, and more generally the compensation of economic damages before and after the decision, have become extremely complicated under Florida law. For example, Florida law treats past medical expenses differently depending on whether they were paid by Medicare or Medicaid or by private health insurance. In the case of Medicare or Medicaid, the courts have ruled that after insurance adjustments, a jury can only hear net medical bills. .