My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad



« The NLJ's Litigators of the Year, Each with a Unique Story | Main | Depositions: Boxing In the Witness »



Well crum...I am in the process of writing a Motion in Limine on this very issue from the defendant's standpoint. I'm in Oklahoma, so this isn't precedent, but I guess I better make sure I haven't cited Peterson. :)

I wonder how this would go if the defendant and the health care provider whose bill was reduced by Medicare were one and the same. That's my case. There's good arguments that the collateral source rule would not apply then because the Defendant's contract with Medicare is the source of the discount.


Chicago PI Atty

How about your experience with liens post-Catour and the recent Illinois lien act -- I defeated a medical group by settling with the HMO -- and any thoughts of your experience with CMS and Medicare and Medicaid liens -- it is so slow --

tom o

The really terrible thing about the decision from the defendant's perspective is that they can't even bring up what was actually paid as evidence of what is "reasonable." At least Arthur gave defense attorneys that. We could ask doctors: You billed X but you took 1/2 of X, right? And that was full payment? Now we can't do that.

The comments to this entry are closed.



    How to Feed a Lawyer (and Other Irreverent Observations from the Legal Underground)

    Click on the book cover for details!

Search Trial Practice Tips