Post Howell

As previously noted, the CA Supreme Court in Howell ruled that only the amount of the actual bills paid, not billed (or their reasonable value), was the measure of medical damages allowed a plaintiff in a negligence civil case. If a plaintiff had a $100,000 hospital bill, but his Blue Cross plan contractually only paid $20,000 of that bill, the plaintiff’s trial damages were limited to the $20,000 paid, irrespective of who paid the premiums for years for that medical coverage.

This case will cause years of appellate arguments on issues dealing with medical bills and their relevance to non-economic damages for pain and suffering, as well as evidence dealing with likely future medical care costs. Aside from this writers’ opinion that the underpinnings of the Supreme Court’s decision were simply wrong, the uncertainty and legal costs following this decision will wreak havoc on the parties and the lower courts wrestling with tangential issues.

An appellate court has recently tackled  a Howell - related issue concerning a plaintiff’s right to recoup medical expenses at trial that were billed and gratuitously written off by the provider. This court in Sanchez v. Strickland held that written-off medical bills are allowable to a plaintiff at trial, as they foster charitable action. The plaintiff gets the benefit of a doctor’s charity, even though neither he nor his insurer paid this portion of the bill, but only the defendant gets the benefit of a write-down when a plaintiff’s insurer pays the freight. Oh boy.