Itemization of Medical Expenses in a Personal Injury Lawsuit
A plaintiff must prove that all expenses, including medical expenses, are reasonable and necessary in order to recover for them. Without proof of reasonableness and necessity, the plaintiff fails to prove causation between the tort and the medical bill. A plaintiff who provides the defendant with an itemized list of medical expenses at least 90 days before trial gets a rebuttable presumption that the expenses are reasonable. Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 24-5-113(b). In addition to the presumption of reasonableness, a legible itemization of medical expenses is a much cleaner exhibit for trial than a stack of xeroxed carbon copy medical bills. The itemization can be admitted by the court as a summary under Tennessee Rule of Evidence 1006.
Here is a sample itemization. Download file
John:
Isn't there a distinction between Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 24-5-113(a)(the $4,000.00 dollar presumption as to medical bills being reasonable AND necessary that is attached to the complaint) and Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 24-5-113(b)(the no cap on the dollar amount, rebuttable presumption as to the reasonableness of medical bills -- not the necessity -- that must be filed 90 days before trial)?
I wasn't aware of this until the other day. I came across while I was looking for something else. (E.g., the one allows for a presumption that the med. bills are both reasonable AND necessary; the other allows for ONLY a presumption that the med. bills are reasonable, not necessary). Am I reading this correctly? Is this your understanding too? Thanks.
Yes, you are reading it correctly. Section b only gets you part way home.
John;
Does this statute apply to Federal cases based on diversity?
George, I am unaware of any cases on point. although a good argument can be made that it does not. Why? Federal courts apply state substantive law and use their own law of procedure and evidence. Arguably, this is a statute that is TN law of evidence - a method of proving medical bills - and not the substantive law of TN.
Obviously, a contrary argument can be made. But I would not bet on it succeeding.
Good luck. Thanks for reading.