In general, the principle of collateral confiscation is that the injured party should be liable for the full amount of damage caused by its negligence, regardless of any contractual coverage to which the injured party did not pay and was not a party. These principles were discussed and applied in a personal injury case before the Supreme Court of Virginia, excerpts of which are listed below: The collateral source rule applies only to ex delicto claims and covers sums paid to the plaintiff by its own insurer, as well as social security benefits, public and private pension payments, unemployment benefits and workers` compensation. Paid leave and sick pay and other payments made by employers to injured employees, both contractually and free of charge. This rule is intended to place the entire burden of his fault on the injured party. However, if the plaintiff`s injury is combined with wrongdoing of the defendant and the settlement of the accomplice, the credit rule under Virginia Code Sections 8.01-35.1 may intervene to ensure that the defendant is not charged full compensation for any damages that the plaintiff implicitly attributes in part to the comparator in settling the tort claim. In this case, the judgment obtained by the owner against the insurer was reduced by the amount of compensation the owner had received from an insurance services company if the latter had not properly obtained insurance coverage. We are getting results for injured employees and accident victims throughout Virginia. If you have a question about the collateral source rule or simply need help dealing with the insurance company, contact us today. You have nothing to lose.
This page of Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Supreme Court of Virginia and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of collateral source rule and the related topic of personal injury. More information on questions with the collateral source can be found on Wikipedia pages. The exceptions contained in this rule of evidence generally apply to cases of subrogation and not negligence. For example, the negligent party`s insurance company may sue the defendant driver to recover money paid to you as part of a personal injury claim. In this type of action, proof of insurance may be admissible. A defendant in a personal injury case is motivated to provide evidence that a plaintiff did not pay the full amount of the medical bills claimed, but that his insurance paid a portion of the medical bills, and some of the bills were written off under the health care provider`s contract with the plaintiff`s health insurance company. This evidence could reduce the size of the jury prize. The collateral source rule prevents this. The reason for this is that the plaintiff pays premiums to his health insurance company to protect him against unexpected injuries, so the defendant who injures a plaintiff should not receive the health insured`s benefits. The regulation thus serves the salutary purpose of making the unwary fully responsible for the harmful consequences of his behaviour.
In negligence claims, Virginia has long adhered to the “collateral source rule,” which states that payments received by an aggrieved plaintiff from a source other than the aggrieved party/defendant will not be deducted from damages owed by the injured party/defendant to the plaintiff. This principle is conventionally exemplified in personal injury claims, in which the plaintiff`s medical bills are initially paid by the plaintiff`s own health insurance. In this regard, Virginia courts have long held that the aggrieved/defendant receives no credit or benefit from the amounts paid to the plaintiff by her own health insurance company. The injured party/defendant owes the plaintiff all of these sums. An applicant who has provided irrelevant evidence of recovery from other sources is not entitled to an instruction on the ancillary sources regulation. In an action for personal injury or death, the verifiable compensation for loss of income due to that injury or death is not reduced because the plaintiff or deceased is reimbursed for income from another source, and the fact of such reimbursement is not admitted into evidence. A negligent party cannot benefit from the fact that an injured party receives compensation or medical treatment from other sources. The collateral source rule applies to workers` compensation in Virginia because a negligent party cannot deduct receipt of benefits, including payment for lifelong medical treatment, temporary total disability, and permanent partial disability, from the amount owed to the plaintiff in a negligence civil liability action. In the case of personal injury, Virginia prohibits defendants from limiting damages because the plaintiff has insurance.
This principle is called the collateral source rule.