03.08.2013 Views

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

medical costs from the lawsuit.<br />

Some states have moved to modify or abolish the collateral source rule. They may<br />

allow the judge to reduce the plaintiff’s award by the amount of already paid<br />

expenses, allow the defense to tell the jury that the plaintiff has been compensated, or<br />

prevent the plaintiff from claiming for reimbursed injuries. It is not clear how these<br />

rules affect claims for future medical expenses since their payment is contingent on<br />

the plaintiff’s maintaining his or her insurance.<br />

5. Strategies for Paying Damages<br />

The central problem in determining the proper compensation for an injury is the<br />

speculative nature of the claimant’s future medical <strong>and</strong> economic needs. Traditional<br />

insurance schemes pay medical costs as they are incurred. If the claimant requires<br />

treatment five years after the injury, that claim is paid by the insurer at the time the<br />

care is rendered. This creates an open-ended obligation, but it obviates the need to<br />

speculate on the future needs of the claimant when evaluating the claim.<br />

a) Lump Sum Payments<br />

Courts do not like open-ended obligations. When the court enters a judgment, it<br />

wants to be rid of the case. If the defendant is found not liable, the plaintiff may not<br />

bring another lawsuit on the same facts. If the defendant is found liable, he or she<br />

must pay the plaintiff a sum that will compensate the plaintiff for both existing<br />

losses <strong>and</strong> all the future losses related to the injury. The plaintiff cannot come back<br />

to the court <strong>and</strong> ask for money for unforeseen consequences of the injury, <strong>and</strong> the<br />

defendant cannot come back to court <strong>and</strong> request a refund of the money if the<br />

plaintiff does not need all of it. This finality creates an incentive on both sides to put<br />

an unrealistic value on the plaintiff’s injuries: plaintiffs dem<strong>and</strong> too high a figure,<br />

<strong>and</strong> defendants offer too little. If the plaintiff prevails with the high value, the<br />

defendant must pay more than is appropriate. If the defendant prevails, the plaintiff<br />

may become a ward of the state for unpaid medical expenses.<br />

The lump sum payment in a lawsuit is intended to last for the duration of the effects<br />

of the injury. For many cases, this means the rest of the plaintiff’s life. These<br />

judgments may be $1 million cash, tax free. (Personal injury settlements <strong>and</strong> court<br />

awards are tax free.) Managing a sum of this magnitude so that it provides current<br />

income <strong>and</strong> future security is a difficult task. In many, perhaps most, cases, the<br />

money will be gone in a few years, <strong>and</strong> the plaintiff is left in debt, sometimes from<br />

failed investment schemes. This is undesirable social policy because plaintiffs or<br />

their dependents often become wards of the state after the lump sum has been<br />

dissipated.<br />

b) Structured Settlements<br />

The most desirable situation is to provide a way of paying the plaintiff’s expenses<br />

48

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!