In personal injury law, establishing the reasonable value of medical care is an important factor in determining how much will actually be paid. In the recent Indiana Supreme Court case of Patchett v. Lee, the court was asked to determine whether discounted reimbursements negotiated between a plaintiff’s medical provider and their private health insurer could be considered in court, as long as the actual insurance isn’t noted. The court had previously held in 2009 that such information was worthy and relevant to measure the reasonable value of the medical care the plaintiff received. The specific issue in Patchett was whether this thinking was equally applicable to discounted reimbursements from government-backed insurers. The court held that it was.
According to court records, the defendant didn’t deny she negligently drove her vehicle into oncoming traffic one day four years ago. In so doing, she struck the plaintiff’s vehicle, causing injuries to the plaintiff that necessitated medical treatment. The defendant admitted she was responsible for the collision and generally agreed the plaintiff received medical treatment that was necessary for her crash-related injuries.
That meant the only issue here was the reasonable value of the plaintiff’s medical care. The ensuing trial was solely a matter of damages.