Lawyers engaged actively in a personal injury trial practice are aware that the “recovery of medical or healthcare expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid or incurred by or on behalf of the claimant.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 41.0105 (2015) (emphasis added). The statute shows an intent by the legislature to limit the recovery of medical or healthcare expenses to a “‘smaller circle’ of expenses incurred after an adjustment of the healthcare provider’s bill.” Mills v. Fletcher, 229 S.W.3d 765, 768-69 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2007, no pet.). The amounts charged initially for medical care are often reduced as a result of contractual amounts charged to the insured. Likewise, governmental regulations require that medical providers charge a percentage of their standard rates in cases involving Social Security, Medicare, and Worker’s Compensation. Daughters of Charity Health Servs. of Waco v. Linnstaedter, 226 S.W.3d 409, 410 (Tex. 2007).

While the “paid or incurred” statute seems relatively clear, the statute was often subject to conflicting and inconsistent application until the Texas Supreme Court opinion in Haygood v. De Escabedo, 356 S.W.3d 390 (Tex. 2011). Prior to the decision in Haygood, claimants urged trial courts to allow juries to receive evidence of the total amount of medical expenses. Claimants wanted juries to evaluate the seriousness of their injuries, including noneconomic loss damages, in the context of the total amount charged. Furthermore, attorneys for claimants claimed that the downward “adjustments” were collateral sources that should not be made known to a jury.

Read original article


Tags: