Close, but no Cigar: Issues with Louisiana Revised Statutes § 9:2800.27 and the Collateral Source Rule
Author | Andrew G. Jarreau |
Position | J.D./D.C.L., 2021. Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University |
Pages | 363-402 |
Louisiana Law Review Louisiana Law Review
Volume 81
Number 1
Fall 2020
Article 14
12-11-2020
Close, but no Cigar: Issues with Louisiana Revised Statutes § Close, but no Cigar: Issues with Louisiana Revised Statutes §
9:2800.27 and the Collateral Source Rule 9:2800.27 and the Collateral Source Rule
Andrew G. Jarreau
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev
Repository Citation Repository Citation
Andrew G. Jarreau,
Close, but no Cigar: Issues with Louisiana Revised Statutes § 9:2800.27 and the
Collateral Source Rule
, 81 La. L. Rev. (2020)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol81/iss1/14
This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital
Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital
Commons. For more information, please contact kreed25@lsu.edu.
348056-LSU_81-1_Text.indd 359348056-LSU_81-1_Text.indd 359 12/2/20 7:03 AM12/2/20 7:03 AM
: Issues with Louisiana Revised Close, but No Cigar
Statutes § 9:2800.27 and the Collateral Source Rule
Andrew G. Jarreau*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction.................................................................................. 356
I. Louisiana Tort Recovery & the Collateral Source Rule............... 361
A. Tort Recovery in Louisiana and Its Connection
with the Collateral Source Rule............................................. 361
B. The Collateral Source Rule in the United States ................... 363
1 General Development of the Collateral
Source Rule ..................................................................... 363
2. Other States’ Applications of the Collateral
Source Rule ..................................................................... 364
C. The Collateral Source Rule in Louisiana............................... 366
II. Bozeman v. State: The Beginning of a Restrictive Era................. 368
A. The Accident That Brought Change ...................................... 369
B. The Bozeman Court’s Multi-Jurisdictional
Analysis of the Collateral Source Rule.................................. 371
1. Reasonable Value of Services......................................... 371
2. Actual Amounts Paid ...................................................... 373
3. Benefit of the Bargain ..................................................... 374
C. The Result from Bozeman:
A Two-Pronged Inquiry......................................................... 375
D. You Get What You Pay For................................................... 376
1. Attorney-Negotiated Write-offs:
Not a Mode of Excessive Recovery ................................ 376
2. The Advantage of the Collateral Source
Rule and Workers’ Compensation .................................. 377
E. Louisiana Revised Statutes § 9:2800.27:
A Step in the Right Direction ................................................ 379
III. One Step Forward and a Half Step Back...................................... 382
A. An Unpleasant Statute for Both Parties ................................. 382
Copyright 2020, by ANDREW G. JARREAU.
* J.D./D.C.L., 2021. Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University.
I would like to specially thank Professor Heidi Thompson for her guidance
throughout the writing process.
348056-LSU_81-1_Text.indd 360348056-LSU_81-1_Text.indd 360 12/2/20 7:03 AM12/2/20 7:03 AM
356 LOUISIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 81
B. Phantom Charges, Real Money ............................................. 384
IV. A Few Changes to Make Everyone Happy .................................. 385
A. Fixing a Bad Compromise ..................................................... 386
B. A Change to Deflate Jury Verdicts........................................ 388
C. Application of the Proposed Statute ...................................... 389
1. Private Insurance Benefits............................................... 389
2. Attorney-Negotiated Write-Offs ..................................... 391
3. Self-Negotiated Write-Offs............................................. 392
Conclusion.................................................................................... 393
INTRODUCTION
On October 11, 2007, Dr. Maureen Jones arrived at the Paris Parker
Salon to receive a Swedish massage.1 Rather than leaving refreshed, Dr.
Jones left Paris Parker Salon with pain and discomfort in her lower back.2
By the following day, Dr. Jones’s pain had increased so significantly that
she sought immediate medical treatment.3 An MRI revealed that Dr. Jones
had suffered a ruptured disc in her lower back.4 After a failed attempt at
conservative treatment, she underwent surgery.5 Dr. Jones subsequently
filed suit against the salon, the masseuse, and the salon’s insurance
provider.6 At a bench trial, the court ruled in favor of Dr. Jones, finding
that the masseuse breached the applicable standard of care and awarding
Dr. Jones damages in excess of $800,000.7
Despite the considerable award of damages, Dr. Jones never received
a bill for what the health care provider charged.8 Dr. Jones testified that
the Baton Rouge Clinic did not charge her for the services she received
there as a professional courtesy.9 The Louisiana First Circuit Court of
Appeal ruled, however, that Louisiana’s collateral source rule applied to
1. Johnson v. Neill Corp., No. 2015 CA 0430, 2015 WL 9464625, at *1 (La.
Ct. App. 1st Cir. Dec. 23, 2015).
2. Id.
3. Id.
4. Id.
5. Id.
6. Id.
7. Id.
8. Id. at *2.
9. Id. at *10.
To continue reading
Request your trial