View opinion on Lexis AdvanceWe choose to adopt the rule that gratuitous or discounted medical services are a collateral source not to be considered in assessing the damages due a personal-injury plaintiff.
Torts II, Pages 563–565
Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc. v. Anderson
Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1998
Facts:
Plaintiff fell while shopping in defendant's store. Defendant's personnel sent her to the hospital where she was treated, costing a total of $24,512.45. However, plaintiff's attorney negotiated a 50% for her.
Plaintiff's Argument:
The collateral-source rule prohibits defendant from introducing evidence of the discount.
Procedural History:
Trial court denied the motion in limine, ruling that the discount was a collateral source and allowed evidence of the amount billed by the hospital.
Note:
A motion in limine is a motion to request evidence to be excluded.Issue:
Does the collateral source rule prohibit evidence of gratuitous medical services?
Reasoning:
A substantial number of other jurisdictions and the Restatement have held that the plaintiff may recover the value of services gratuitously rendered.
Rule/Holding:
Page 565, Paragraph 5
Judgment:
Affirmed.