King

King v. Willmett

Good Law
113 Cal. Rptr. 3d 742·187 Cal. App. 4th 313
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 2010C059236California8,932 words

Opinion

Opinion

CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.

In this case we primarily consider whether, in a negligence action against a nonpublic defendant, the reduction of a plaintiff's award of past medical expense damages to the dollar amount ultimately paid by the plaintiff's private health insurance to his health care providers is appropriate under the collateral source rule. In light of the public policy conclusions expressed by our state Supreme Court and the Legislature's enactment of specific statutes governing the operation of the collateral source rule in limited kinds of cases, we conclude reduction is inappropriate in this case. Therefore, the trial court erred in reducing the award here. [1]

In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject plaintiff's other contentions of reversible error.

We shall reverse the amended judgment on verdict and remand the matter to the trial court with directions to reinstate the jury's award of past medical expense damages and enter a new judgment in favor of plaintiff with interest and costs consistent with such award.

Plaintiff Michael King, an insurance defense attorney employed as the managing attorney for the Sacramento legal office for Farmers Insurance, was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.