The collateral source rule, also sometimes referred to as the collateral source doctrine, prohibits the admission of evidence that a plaintiff or victim has received compensation from some source other than defendant. The idea is a defendant shouldn’t have to pay less for a tortious act just because a plaintiff had health insurance or collected workers’ compensation.

Still, since 1984, the court had allowed a limited admission of evidence regarding certain kinds of free or low-cost future collateral source benefits. But that has now changed. In the Joerg case, the court ruled all defendants are barred from introducing evidence of collateral source benefits plaintiffs may receive in the future. These include Medicare and Medicaid. Given that almost all Americans will at least collect on Medicare at some point in their lives, the decision has widespread implications in personal injury law.

In many personal injury lawsuits in Florida, recovery of medical expenses – including future expenses – is a big piece of the puzzle.

According to court records in Joerg, plaintiff here is a mentally disabled adult who lived with his parents his whole life and never worked. As a result of his situation, he received Medicare for medical bills. One day in November 2007, plaintiff was riding his bicycle when he was struck by a motor vehicle.

He filed a negligence action against the driver, as well as with respondant in this case, who was his own uninsured motorist carrier. Before trial, plaintiff withdrew his action against driver and pressed his case against the insurer.

His attorneys filed a motion to exclude all evidence of any collateral source of evidence to which plaintiff was entitled – including discounted benefits under the federal programs. Trial court granted this motion, but only with respect to past medical bills. When attorneys moved for reconsideration, trial court vacated that prior ruling and allowed the insurer to introduce evidence of future medical bills for specific treatment or services available to all citizens, regardless of wealth. However, it prohibited insurer from presenting evidence of future Medicare or Medicaid benefits.

Following a four-day trial, jurors awarded plaintiff $1.5 million – including nearly $470,000 in future medical expenses.

Insurer appealed, and the Second District affirmed on all issues – except with regard to the admissibility of future medical benefits. The court ruled that because plaintiff’s federal benefits were free and unearned, they should not be excluded by the collateral source rule. District court reversed on the issue of future damages and remanded.

Plaintiff then appealed to state supreme court. Justices held it was improper to introduce evidence regarding Medicare benefits because some are required to reimburse the agency for future benefits, and plus, there is no guarantee of these benefits. The court also ruled it was speculative to attempt to calculate damage awards based on benefits plaintiff hadn’t yet received and might never receive. Federal benefits – and eligibility for those benefits – are as always uncertain because they are subject to limited public funding or legislative action that’s unpredictable.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Joerg v. State Farm, Oct. 15, 2015, Florida Supreme Court

More Blog Entries:

Roma v. Moreira – Duty of Landlord to Prevent Tenant Injuries, Nov. 24, 2015, Fort Lauderdale Personal Injury Attorney Blog

• Fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled;
• Percentage of fatal crashes involving failure to obey traffic laws;
• Drunk driving;
• Speeding;
• Careless driving resulting in fatal crashes with pedestrians and bicyclists per 100,000 residents.

Interestingly, Montana was deemed to have the worst drivers in the country. That was followed by South Carolina, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Arizona, Hawaii, North Dakota Delaware and Mississippi.

However, Florida did come out No. 1 in one category: Careless Driving.

This comes as little surprise to our Fort Lauderdale car accident attorneys.

The Sunshine State ranked 16th for number of traffic deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. We ranked 29th for traffic fatalities related to violations of traffic laws, such as obeying traffic signals or wearing a seat belt. We were 41st when it came to drunk driving and 51st when it came to speeding. However, we were No. 1 when it came to careless driving for fatal collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists per 100,000.

While the fact the state ranks so low with regard to speeding and drunk driving is a bit surprising, the grave situation as it relates to bicyclists and pedestrians is less than shocking. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s annual Traffic Safety Facts for bicyclists and other cyclists in 2013, there were 743 bicyclists killed and another 48,000 killed nationally that year. That represented a 20 percent increase in the number of deaths since 2010, and was in no small part due to the numbers in Florida. That year, the state had 133 bicyclist fatalities, accounting for 5.5 percent of all traffic deaths.

The only state that had a higher number of bicycle deaths was California, which had 141. That’s just eight more deaths, despite the fact that California outnumbers Florida by about 19 million people.

Similarly, the NHTSA’s 2013 Traffic Safety Facts data on pedestrians indicated that of the 4,735 pedestrians killed in the U.S. that year, 501 of them were from Florida. California did have 200 more pedestrian deaths that year, but when population was factored in, California’s rate was 1.83 per 100,000 population, whereas Florida’s was 2.56 per 100,000 population. Delaware had the highest percentage of traffic fatalities – 2.70 per 100,000 population, but the overall number of pedestrian deaths in that state was 25. In the District of Columbia, the 9 pedestrian deaths in the state that year comprised 45 percent of all its traffic fatalities, compared to Florida’s 20.8 percent.

The most recent study factored in statistics available from the NHTSA.

Florida’s careless driving statute is codified in F.S. 316.1925. The law states that anyone who operates a vehicle on public roads have to do so in a “careful and prudent manner,” with appropriate regard for grade, width, curves, corners, traffic and “all other attendant circumstances.” Failure to do so will not only result in a ticket and fine, it could means civil litigation that results in costly liability for any resultant injuries.

Although the statute does not specifically define, “careful and prudent manner,” it’s often cited in rear-end collisions (for failure to maintain a safe distance), failrue to check when reversing (failure to yield), unsafe overtaking and striking a pedestrian.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Car Insurance Study Settles It: Montana Has Worst Drivers, Nov. 27, 2015, By Bart Jansen, USA Today

More Blog Entries:

Technology Holds Promise of Ending Driver Distraction, Nov. 13, 2015, Fort Lauderdale Injury Lawyer Blog