re: In other news... Gov. Landry once again endorses outright theft in tort litigation - maybe

quote:

---

PS I do agree with amendments to the collateral source rule. One thing that “trial lawyers” do that actually does increase litigation expense is this unholy union with orthopedic surgeons and pain management doctors. Attys have gotten to the point where they finance the doctors so the bill can say whatever the lawyer wants to show the jury. That shite is shady AF

---

I don’t engage in litigation finance and agree that should be disclosed.

But I also think it should be disclosed if I offer to let the tortfeasor’s insurer pay the medical bill and they refuse.

My client should be able to finance their medical care if the at-fault carrier won’t.

What the frick are you getting on about? Should someone pay more than what is owed in the medical bills because PI attorneys have the same shyster doctors they use on repeat to run up medical bills? Someone backs into somebody and there’s 6 months of chiropractic treatment give me a fricking break.

Agreed.

I think that the amendments to the collateral source rule should also include

1) Limitations on contracts btwn lawyers and doctors regarding litigation financing-plus preventatives which prohibit the “face value” of the medical care from being higher than the doc accepts;

2) Statutory moody fees available to PI lawyers for recovering for BCBS payments that they are only getting back bc BCBS has the windfall of guilty 3rd parties (basically letting the lawyer show the jury a 20% markup);

3) Reduction of the insurer’s recovery by plaintiff’s fault

4) Reduction of the insurer’s recovery in cases where the medical expenses exceed the plaintiffs recovery

quote:

---

Are you saying that the judgment value of a case for the same plantiff with the same injuries and treatment is different based on the amount of liability insurance available?

---

No but the amount a medical insurer should be able to recover from an injured person shouldn’t exceed what the injured person would otherwise be able to recover.

Yeah try a case in front of judges whose campaigns are paid for by the plaintiffs’ bar I’m sure they’ll get a fair shake. Luckily the average citizen is getting sick and tired of the shysters

quote:

---

Many plaintiff attys have contracts with some physicians, especially chiropractors, to where they will discount their charges to the atty but the attys presents the full costs when it comes time to settle. As most plaintiff attys front the medical costs......in big money cases... but claim the full, actual costs when it comes time to get their share of the settle money.

---

It’s fraud and they’re allowed to get away with it.

Insurers know the deck is stacked against them in Louisiana and that is why the good insurers stay away. We’re left with the dregs and that is why a lot of us have had bad experiences with insurance carries

If we had fertile ground here for insurers to make an underwriting profit, we would see more carriers come into the state and create the competition that we need to get rates down.

Ask yourself this simple question

What does Louisiana need more of-
Plaintiff attorneys or insurance carriers?

Why would ERISA preempt a state subrogation rule pertaining to health insurance or a collateral source rule that would tack on 20% to pay a lawyer. Right now the rule of thumb is stated amount of meds plus 40% of the difference.

Hell, I’m not even sure that Obamacare would preempt an evidentiary rule . . . My God even CMS and all its psycho conduct will reduce its recovery rights by 20 percent to pay atty.

Regardless Booosie I am simpatico with you on this one. And too many people think insurance reform and tort reform are the same thing.

Landry (who has been a relatively awful governor) has the exact correct position on this.

I’ve definitely settled cases that BCBS tried to take all the $$$$ - (on the defense side. I legit had to file a concursus one time).

There’s plenty of bullshite on the insurance side and the Gordon side of the PI business.

Both are distasteful

quote:

---

I’ve definitely settled cases that BCBS tried to take all the $$$$ - (on the defense side. I legit had to file a concursus one time).

---

Well, they have a contractual right of reimbursement in their contract with their the policyholder.

quote:

---

Well, they have a contractual right of reimbursement in their contract with their the policyholder.

---

For transparency’s sake, should the jury get to know that?