A large part of my practice at Isaac Brant is defense litigation. For example, Bob gets injured in a construction site accident and sues for his injuries. Bob naturally goes to the doctor to get better. Modern medicine is not perfect and its not magic either. Humans cannot be rebuilt better, stronger, and faster than they were before. In real life, Bob has been left with permanent injuries to his body and will suffer a lifetime of pain that can only be managed – not cured.

Ohio juries will hear how much the doctor took, not how much she charged.
If the people that Bob sued are found responsible for his injuries, it is only fair that they should pay his medical bills. For his continued pain and suffering, our society has determined that money is supposed to make it all better. For a very long time, a common outcome for legitimate injury cases was an award of the plaintiff’s medical bills multiplied by three. Bob has $25,000 in medical bills, so a fair settlement or jury verdict could be $75,000 to account for his bills and his continued pain and suffering.
Now, enter BIG health insurance and our lovely health care system. What a lot of people do not realize is that, when a doctor charges $1,000 for a medical procedure, she has a contract with the health insurance companies where she previously agreed to accept $500 for that procedure and call it “paid in full.” In many real life scenarios, Bob would produce his medical bills at trial showing that his doctor charged $25,000 for his medical treatment where, in actuality, only $9,000 was paid. So what’s fair? Is it fair for the jury to hear that Bob has $25,000 in medical bills knowing that $14,000 was just written off? Or is it fair for the jury to hear that $9,000 was the amount accepted as payment in full for Bob’s treatment? Continue reading →
You must be logged in to post a comment.