Home > Legal Library > Article

Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected

Trial Court Excludes Evidence of Medical Bills in Excess of Payments by Medicare/Medicaid

Gregory S. Emrick
Semmes Bowen Semmes A Professional Corporation - Baltimore Office

August 22, 2013

Previously published on August 2013

Jadine Acker v. Specialty Hospital of Washington-Hadley, LLC, No. 2018 (Superior Court of the District of Columbia July 19, 2013)

Defendants, Specialty Hospital of Washington-Hadley, LLC (“Specialty Hospital”), filed a pretrial Motion in Limine as to the amounts of Plaintiff’s medical bills that were not covered by payments from Medicare and/or Medicaid. Judge Cordero of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia granted the motion.

Plaintiff, Jadine Acker, allegedly fell from her hospital bed and fractured her right hip while in the care of Defendants. She sued for medical malpractice. Plaintiff was a Medicare and Medicaid recipient, which paid for $191,734.39 of the total $581,662.09 in resulting medical expenses. Defendant contended that the amounts not paid by Medicare and/or Medicaid were not owed by Plaintiff, and permitting the evidence to be a part of the case would result in a “windfall” for the Plaintiff. Plaintiff argued that the Defendants’ position violated the collateral source doctrine.

In her July 19, 2013, Order, Judge Cordero started by analyzing the District of Columbia’s collateral source doctrine, noting that the “doctrine applies in cases where a third party is involved and a plaintiff may be entitled to ‘benefit and judgment’ from the tortfeasor and/or the collateral source. The collateral source doctrine is used to allow a plaintiff to recover additional compensation because he ‘contracted’ for it. The goal of the collateral source doctrine is to ensure the ‘amount of damages owed by a tortfeasor’ is not ‘reduce[d]’ if a ‘tort victim has received benefits from a collateral source.’” Judge Cordero then noted that the reduced payments were made under the contracts between Medicare/Medicaid and Specialty Hospital, which obligated it to accept set rates for its services, and write-off any excess. “Thus [...] the application of the collateral source rule would, in this case, result in a double payment by the alleged tortfeasor.”

The Court then held that because the collateral source rule did not apply, “the evidence admissible to the jury is only the amounts actually paid by Medicare/Medicaid. [...] Evidence of medical expenses beyond what was paid by Medicare/Medicaid is inadmissible.” As July 19, 2013, trial in this matter is set for April 7, 2014.


The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.

View More Library Documents By...

Semmes Bowen Semmes A Professional Corporation Overview