- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: La. Tort Reform 2025
Posted on 4/7/25 at 12:42 pm to udtiger
Posted on 4/7/25 at 12:42 pm to udtiger
quote:
Collateral source ... needs to happen.
Please explain this to me. I have tried everyway I can to try to understand why the collateral source rule should be done away with. I cannot. I don't mess with much PI but I've been on the plaintiffs side when I have. So I am certainly biased.
But, basic ideas:
1. I pay for health insurance.
2. Insurance negotiates the cost of services with HCPs. Therefore, I receive a benefit because of my premium payments/contract of insurance.
3. I get into an accident that is not my fault and utilize HCPs at the negotiated rate that I would not have received if I was a cash patient.
Why should the tortfeasor benefit from this situation of me paying for insurance versus me paying for cash?
3
Posted on 4/7/25 at 12:47 pm to rmc
quote:
Why should the tortfeasor benefit from this situation of me paying for insurance versus me paying for cash?
Why should you pocket a windfall?
Medical bills charged in personal injury cases are funny money. Not real. They can be inflated to whatever someone wants to be, because nobody ever has to pay that number. There is no such thing as a "cash patient." The only person who ever has to pay that ridiculous number is the tortfeasor's insurer.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 12:49 pm to AlxTgr
Louisiana Tort Reform...
Lolol.
They left out the part about "funding for more billboards"....
Lolol.
They left out the part about "funding for more billboards"....
Posted on 4/7/25 at 12:50 pm to craynagin
quote:There's actually an advertisement bill, but I don't see it having a future there or the supreme court.
They left out the part about "funding for more billboards"....
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:11 pm to rmc
quote:In addition to what Slippy said, it's not about benefit to a tortfeasor, it's about not making a tortfeasor pay something that neither exists nor is an item of damages under the law. The bills coming out of our hospitals after a small accident have become truly unbelievable. Worse if they are a trauma center.
Why should the tortfeasor benefit from this situation of me paying for insurance versus me paying for cash?
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:14 pm to udtiger
quote:
50%+1 contributory negligence bar will never fricking happen.
We had contributory negligence until it was changed to comparative fault in 1979.
Those people will still get hurt. Their care will just fall on the public health system with no recovery from private insurance companies. I.e Medicaid will still pay for the hospital visits, the state is just not getting paid back what Medicaid paid from any third-party auto insurance.
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:15 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
UM venue - Parish of tortfeasor
This is rando- UM insurance covers the plaintiff not the tortfeasor.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:15 pm to PoBoy1
quote:
Avoyelles Parish puts the "hell" in judicial hellhole, in terms of ridiculous monetary awards and judicial rulings.
This
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:17 pm to Wednesday
quote:It's not.
This is rando-
quote:And?
UM insurance covers the plaintiff not the tortfeasor.
The provision has been abused for decades. Plaintiff sues UM even though underlying has over $1 million in coverage just to move the suit, and the defendant driver, to his/her own Parish.
I'll edit again to clean up my sloppy wording.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:17 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
In addition to what Slippy said, it's not about benefit to a tortfeasor, it's about not making a tortfeasor pay something that neither exists nor is an item of damages under the law. The bills coming out of our hospitals after a small accident have become truly unbelievable. Worse if they are a trauma center.
Thank you (and Slippy) for the responses. It sounds like medical billing is also an issue that should be addressed.
I agree that medical bills are out of control. I have friends in banking who say for lending they disregard medical debt for the most part.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:19 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
The provision has been abused for decades. Plaintiff sues UM even though underlying has over $1 million in coverage just to move the suit, and the defendant driver, to his/her own Parish.
Ok NOW it makes sense. Thank you.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:19 pm to rmc
quote:Yup
It sounds like medical billing is also an issue that should be addressed.
And in my experience, if an uninsured person comes up with almost anything at all, the provider will jump on it.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:36 pm to rmc
quote:
Please explain this to me. I have tried everyway I can to try to understand why the collateral source rule should be done away with. I cannot. I don't mess with much PI but I've been on the plaintiffs side when I have. So I am certainly biased.
But, basic ideas:
1. I pay for health insurance.
2. Insurance negotiates the cost of services with HCPs. Therefore, I receive a benefit because of my premium payments/contract of insurance.
3. I get into an accident that is not my fault and utilize HCPs at the negotiated rate that I would not have received if I was a cash patient.
Why should the tortfeasor benefit from this situation of me paying for insurance versus me paying for cash?
Why should you receive a windfall because you got into an accident?
You should recover what your insurance paid out (because you have a contractual obligation to do so) and any deductibles/out of pocket you may have paid. You were paying premium anyway, so you haven't been damaged through that payment.
But requiring the tortfeasor (or his insurer) to pay for the full amount of the billed charges, instead of what was actually paid for the service, requires him/her to pay more damages than he/she actually caused - which constitutes punitive damages.
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 1:46 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
UM venue-parish of tortfeasor
quote:The parish of the tortfeasor has always been a proper venue for an accident case because you have to exhaust the tortfeasor’s insurance policy before you can get to the UM policy.
Can you explain
Posted on 4/7/25 at 2:01 pm to geauxpurple
quote:Right, but current law would allow a Caddo resident to file in Caddo against an Orleans defendant for an accident that occurred in Jefferson simply by adding the UM.
The parish of the tortfeasor has always been a proper venue for an accident case because you have to exhaust the tortfeasor’s insurance policy before you can get to the UM policy.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 2:01 pm to geauxpurple
quote:
quote:
UM venue-parish of tortfeasor
quote:
Can you explain
The parish of the tortfeasor has always been a proper venue for an accident case because you have to exhaust the tortfeasor’s insurance policy before you can get to the UM policy.
Plaintiff's attorneys will sue UM to get home cooking, especially if there are big limits for underlying. Defendants have to hope to forum non out of those parishes but the judges that are getting there bread buttered by the plaintiffs bar will deny them and appellate courts rarely grant writs.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 2:46 pm to udtiger
quote:
Why should you receive a windfall because you got into an accident?
I would say I don't view it as a windfall. I think that's probably the difference in view points on this issue.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 2:47 pm to cornerstore
quote:How much of it? At least some have passed each attempt. I think only collateral source was vetoed last time.
DOA
Posted on 4/7/25 at 3:13 pm to TIGERHOLD
quote:
Not happening. Our state legislators were busy hanging out with their pal Gordon on his private jet this weekend.
Tar and feathering definitely needs to make a comeback.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News