We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
BILLED V. PAID - WHY THE AMOUNT BILLED BY A MEDICAL PROVIDER IS THE ONLY AMOUNT A JURY SHOULD CONSIDER IN DETERMINING THE REASONABLE VALUE OF MEDICAL CARE IN A NORTH DAKOTA PERSONAL INJURY ACTION.
- Authors
HYO, JAMES R.
- Abstract
In almost every North Dakota personal injury trial, a jury must decide the reasonable value of an injured plaintiffs medical care in determining damages. Despite settled case law, there is disagreement about the evidence a jury should be allowed to consider in making the determination. Specifically, parties argue whether a jury should be allowed to consider the amounts billed by a plaintiffs medical providers, the amounts paid by a plaintiffs health insurer, or both. North Dakota district courts have not universally reached the outcome supported by long-standing North Dakota Supreme Court precedent interpreting the State's collateral source statute. As a result, this Article details how North Dakota law and principles of equity and public policy support the conclusion that a district court should only allow a jury to consider the amounts billed by a plaintiffs medical providers in determining the reasonable value of the plaintiffs medical care.
- Subjects
UNITED States; PERSONAL injury lawsuits; DAMAGES (Law); NORTH Dakota. Supreme Court; MEDICAL care laws
- Publication
North Dakota Law Review, 2020, Vol 95, Issue 1, p137
- ISSN
0029-2745
- Publication type
Article