As our Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyers can explain, this could impact how we as attorneys approach settlement negotiations.

The case that kickstarted the dispute in Gallardo v. Marstiller is a tragic one. A 13-year-old girl has been left in a persistent vegetative state after she was hit by a truck while getting off a school bus. She received a settlement of $800,000 against the owner of the truck, the driver, and the school board. (The cost of catastrophic injuries like this for someone so young can easily stretch into many millions of dollars over her lifetime.)

But then, the Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration imposed a lien on her settlement money, asserting that it was entitled to seize $300,000 of the money that was set aside for past and future medical expenses. The district court in Florida ruled against the state, arguing the federal Medicaid Act barred the state from being reimbursed for past paid medical expenses from the portion of the settlement that is set aside for future medical expenses. In the summer of 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed in favor of the state’s action.

It was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in January and is expected to rule in the coming months.

This was expected to be a fairly straightforward question of statutory interpretation on what state Medicaid programs should receive from third-party litigation – but the high court was surprisingly divided. Most justices appeared to agree that where the state had paid for injuries that the beneficiary suffered, it had a right to take from the part of the settlement/damages that is apportioned to past medical expenses. The problem arises, though, when the settlement reached for past medical expenses isn’t actually enough to repay Medicaid for what it paid. So then is the state also allowed to take part of the settlement set aside for future medical expenses?

Federal statutory guidance on this is a bit confusing. For starters, Medicaid is responsible for paying medical expenses. It does not loan money so they can be reimbursed later. So for the most part, the state isn’t allowed to recover its expenses from the person who was injured. But the game changes when a third-party was responsible for the injury and thus is liable to pay for the injured person’s expenses. In that instance, the state can seek reimbursement from that third party, per 42 USC 1396k(a)(1)(A). The way that statute is worded though, it might seem to allow for collection for past payments from a future medical expense fund. However, a bit further down, the provision seems to indicate a narrower definition.

The justices focused a lot of analysis on the statutory language. Several of their initial comments seeming to suggest that the language supports the state’s view that it can collect on all medical expense payouts, whether for past or future medical expenses, up to the amount the state has paid. However, as the discussion progressed, a number of the justices seemed to be dissatisfied with the broad implications of the state’s legal interpretation. By all accounts, Sotomayor appeared firmly against the state’s position, but how the other justices will decide is still up in the air.

Although it’s understood that the state has the right to subrogation and recovery of payments it’s already made, the broader interpretation could require personal injury lawyers representing Medicaid-covered clients to negotiate for higher reimbursement of damages dedicated to all medical expense reimbursements.

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

Additional Resources: SCOTUS Hears Arguments on Florida Medicaid Reimbursement Dispute, Jan. 21, 2022, SCOTUS Blog More Blog Entries: What if the Driver Who Hit Me Was Not Insured?, Aug. 15, 2021, Fort Lauderdale Injury Lawyer Blog

As it stands, federal regulation limits allowances on interstate commercial vehicle operation to those over 21. But last month, the FMCSA announced it was seeking public comment on an initiative to address the commercial truck driver shortage by on-boarding teenage truckers.

Truck accident attorneys understand this was expand an existing pilot program that allows some 200 youths 18-to-20 to operate interstate commercial trucks – but only if they have military training. This expanded version would extend to teens without any formal military training could soon be commandeering 80,000-pound machines, for the purpose of revving up the trucking industry that is experiencing a driver shortage.

Federal regulators are asking for all public input from all stakeholders. They’re bracing for a flood, with big business trucking industry advocates on one side and independent owner-operators, safety groups, railroads and unions on the other. Some have already taken their message to the media, arguing the discussion should be about moving the minimum driving age for truckers up – not down. Even with military training, there is concern it would not be enough to combat inherent youthful immaturity, particularly among males, who are most likely to apply.

How Dangerous Are Teen Drivers and Trucks in Florida?

No other group of drivers is more likely to be involved in a crash than 16-to-20-year-olds. The younger the driver, the higher the risk, with the CDC reporting those ages 16-to-19 were three times as likely to crash as a driver who was 20. The crash fatality rate was double for males.

Car accident attorneys have seen time and again that teens, compared to older drivers, are far more likely to:

• Speed
• Allow less headway between the car ahead
• Underestimate dangerous situations

Nearly 47,000 Florida car accidents every year (out of an average of 390,000 total) involve a driver between the ages of 18 and 20.

Large truck crashes, meanwhile, are on the rise already – a 10 percent increase in fatal truck accidents from 2016 to 2017 and a 5 percent increase in injury-causing large truck crashes.

Florida Truck Accident Lawsuits Prove Challenging

Florida truck accident litigation can be difficult for a few reasons.

First, injuries sustained in a truck accident (almost always occupants of the smaller vehicle) are to often very serious. The sheer size differential means fatalities and catastrophic injuries are a real possibility.

Second is that the setup of the trucking industry makes it difficult to bring claims of vicarious liability for a truck driver’s negligence. That’s because vicarious liability, imposed on a negligent driver’s employer without having to separately prove any fault on the part of the employer, is only permitted where an employer-employee relationship exists. A significant percentage of truck drivers are independent contractors. That doesn’t mean carriers and owners of big rigs (sometimes separate entities) can’t be held liable, but plaintiffs will have to prove negligence against each, which also means you’re often dealing with numerous insurance companies.

Pursuing truck accident injury claims are absolutely worth it – an imperative when injuries are serious. Having an experienced Florida truck accident attorney at your side is key.

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

Additional Resources:

FMCSA Seeks Public Comment on Pilot Program to Allow Drivers Ages 18-20 to Operate Commercial Motor Vehicles in Interstate Commerce, May 2019, FMCSA

All this makes the latest report from TRIP all the more troubling. TRIP is a national research group based in D.C. The latest study opines a $740 billion backlog in infrastructure spending in order fr our nation’s roads, bridges and highways to be safe. Researchers further noted that the deterioration of roads is going to happen even faster as the rate of vehicle travel continues pick up and local and state governments find themselves coming up short to fully fund needed maintenance and repairs.

The shortfall was tallied by an analysis of data complied by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), as well as state and federal bridge and road condition information.

In Florida, the Department of Transportation reports 17 percent of the state’s bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. That’s 2,044 out of 12,070. Further, the percentage of roads that are in either poor or mediocre condition is 26 percent. To fix this issue, it would cost $1.8 billion – or about $128 per driver. But of course, there are some vehicles that contribute more to this damage than others. Commercial carriers are one of those, which is why there has been calls for the industry to pay a higher tax for tolls or other taxation measures intended to beef up government transportation coffers.

Vehicle travel in the U.S. has increased 15 percent between 2000 and 2015. During that same time, travel by commercial trucks spiked by more than 25 percent. Between now and 2030, it’s expected heavy truck travel with increase an additional 75 percent.

The fact that traffic levels are increasing, it’s imperative that we find a way to keep our roads in good repair. Information from AASHTO indicates we need to be spending nearly 40 percent more on our roads – from $88 billion up to $120 billion – in order to keep the roads in bridges in good shape. The problem is that so far, our spending on infrastructure isn’t keeping pace with how many miles are being traveled on these roads.

Poor road conditions not only increase the chances of a truck accident or other type of collision, they result in damage to individual vehicles and we all end up spending more in gas.

The federal Fixing America’s Surface Transportation ACT (the FAST Act) offers approximately $305 billion in transportation funding over the course of five years. However, that money still doesn’t offer a steady, long-term source of revenue for what is going to be an ongoing problem.

When bad roads lead to accidents, there may be an option to seek damages from the government agency responsible for maintenance and repair. However, these cases are complex and involve overcoming sovereign immunity defenses, as well as proving the entity knew about the damage or reasonably should have known about it and failed to address it.

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

Additional Resources:

U.S. has a $740 Billion Backlog of Roads and Bridges Repairs, Nov. 9, 2016, By Clarissa Hawes, Trucks.com

More Blog Entries:

Tour Bus Crash Kills 13, Injures Dozens More, Nov. 3, 2016, Fort Lauderdale Truck Accident Lawyer Blog