When
we are in pre-school, we learn the difference between reality and
make-believe. Little did we know that identifying differences between the
real world and fantasy carries into litigation!
Because non-economic damages are capped in Maryland, plaintiffs’ lawyers have
gotten creative with their life care plans to dramatically increase their
potential recoveries. One way to inflate life care plans is by including
the “sticker price” of future care items, though only a fraction of that amount
will ever be paid.
What can we on the defense do about it?
Maryland Rule 5-702(3) requires a sufficient factual basis for an expert’s
opinion to be admissible. That means plaintiffs’ life care planners have
the burden to demonstrate the basis for their future care cost projections in
their plans.
Public and private databases are resources that provide cost estimates for
proposed care. These estimates are based on real-world experiences of
public and private third-party payors. We use these databases to attack
plaintiffs’ “sticker prices” for proposed care, proving they are not in line with
the real prices of plaintiffs’ future care needs. That way, the plaintiff
will receive compensation for what will likely be paid and NOT an inflated
amount.
Bottom Line:
We need to fight the “make-believe” future care costs we see in life care
plans. Maryland already recognizes that a plaintiff is only entitled to
the amount actually paid for past medical expenses in medical malpractice
cases. It’s time to expand that rule to include future care expenses as
well.
Interested in how we can fight plaintiffs’ life care plans? Contact us. We want to
help.
John T. Sly
Future Care Costs: The Make-Believe World of Plaintiffs’ Life Care Plans
John T. Sly