HOW DOES HEALTH INSURANCE PLAY INTO MY INJURY CASE IN ALABAMA?

Recently, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals issued a disappointing decision that permits insurance companies and their defense attorneys to introduce evidence that the Plaintiff’s medical bills were paid by the Plaintiff’s health insurance company.

The case is Crocker v. Grammer. So, if a Plaintiff, injured through no fault of her own, is hit by a DUI driver, the Courts in Alabama say that the DUI driver can minimize the amount he owes the Plaintiff by suggesting that the actual bill incurred by the Plaintiff was much less due to the presence of the Plaintiff’s own health insurance. Since most health insurance companies have contractual adjustments with health care providers for less than the provider’s sticker price, this, in essence, reduces the Defendant’s liability to Plaintiff.

The problem with the Court decision is that it disregards well-settled rules of evidence and long-standing principles of common law. The Alabama Rules of Evidence state that only relevant evidence is admissible. The fact that a Plaintiff has health insurance is really not relevant to anything as to what the Defendant is responsible for due to a wreck. It is about as relevant as the Plaintiff having a rich grandmother. Thus, the Court disregarded this principle of evidence. Furthermore, the decision does away with the collateral source rule. This is a principle of common law that suggests that the tortfeasor does not get credit for outside sources that might pay the Plaintiff’s medical bills. After all, the Defendant is the one who caused the harm to begin with. The common law held that, if anyone should receive a benefit in this situation, it should be the Plaintiff, not the defendant who caused the harm in the first place.

Make no mistake. What the Alabama court has done is shifted some of the cost of the Defendant’s harm to the Plaintiff. Keep in mind that the Plaintiff who has health insurance pays good money in the form of premiums. What the court has done is punished Plaintiffs with health insurance for being reasonable. They are the ones who went out and bought health insurance to begin with. Instead, the Plaintiffs who do not have insurance may claim the full sticker price of the bill. For Plaintiffs who have governmental insurance through Medicare, Medicaid, or Tricare the Court has shifted some of the cost for the Defendant’s negligence to the taxpayer.

You can see the problems this creates when you have two individuals in the same wreck—one with health insurance, the other without. In essence you have two different, unequal measures of damages. This violates the equal protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions.

However, the attorneys at the Law Offices of Gary O. Bruce, know techniques to minimize the effects of this decision for clients who have health insurance and are injured in Alabama. We are always willing to discuss your potential claim/case through a free consultation.