Issues

    Posts Tagged ‘Howell v Hamilton Meats’

  • CA Supreme Court comes down in favor of big insurance, against consumers Friday, August 19, 2011 � by jg

    In Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, the California Supreme Court ruled those who cause injuries, not those who were injured, will benefit from the reduced prices for medical care and services negotiated by the insurance company of the person who was injured.

  • More from Scott Sumner on the Yanez decision and the collateral source rule Wednesday, June 30, 2010 � by jg

    As between a plaintiff and a defendant in a lawsuit when someone sues the person or company that caused their injury, only the plaintiff has given something up to get their health coverage. Indemnity against healthcare costs is not only a collateral benefit, it is the plaintiff’s collateral benefit.

  • California Supreme Court to review Howell v. Hamilton Meats Friday, March 12, 2010 � by jg

    Attorneys Scott Sumner and Christopher Dolan say the Court should uphold a decision that lets injured Californians recover the entire amount of their medical expense and not just the portion paid by the insurance company.

  • An explanation of the collateral source rule Tuesday, December 22, 2009 � by eric

    If a drunken driver kills your spouse, should that driver get a break because you invested in life insurance? If you are injured and cannot work, should the person who stripped your ability to work pay less because you invested in disability insurance? If you are injured and must get medical care, should the person who sent you to the emergency room gain a financial advantage simply because you invested in health insurance?

  • Updated: Round 2: Plaintiff wins in collateral source case Tuesday, December 22, 2009 � by eric

    A California appellate court today sided with accident victims and against insurance companies for the second time in a month on a key issue related to damages, the collateral source rule.