2016 IL App (1st) 150414
Ill. App. Ct.2016Background
- On June 24, 2008, Smith ran a stop sign and struck Klesowitch’s vehicle; Klesowitch sued for negligence and damages. Smith pled contributory negligence.
- Plaintiff obtained summary judgment on defendant’s negligence/duty and breach, reserving proximate cause and damages for trial.
- On the eve of trial plaintiff produced medical billing records (total billed = $83,788.34); portions of several bills had been written off or adjusted and were not actual payments.
- Trial court admitted the full billed amounts into evidence over defense objection; jury awarded plaintiff $83,788.84 for medical expenses.
- Defendant moved for remittitur/new trial arguing (1) partial summary judgment was improper or prejudicial, (2) late-disclosed bills should be excluded, and (3) written-off portions of bills lacked foundational proof of reasonableness/payment. Trial court denied relief; appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Validity/effect of partial summary judgment on negligence | SJ correctly decided defendant breached duty; court could decide duty/breach and leave causation/damages | SJ was improper or prejudicial because genuine fact issues existed about plaintiff’s contributory negligence and it tainted the jury | Affirmed: court properly entered partial SJ as to duty and breach under 735 ILCS 5/2-1005 and did not bar defendant from arguing contributory fault at trial |
| 2. Failure to timely supplement discovery (undisclosed Ingalls bill) | Defense waived by failing to contemporaneously object and secure a ruling | Bill disclosure was untimely (disclosed day before trial); evidence should have been excluded as sanction | Waived: defendant failed to preserve the discovery-timeliness objection; admission issue not sustained |
| 3. Admissibility of written-off/adjusted ("satisfied") portions of medical bills | Full billed amounts were admissible if proper foundation shows reasonableness or proof that bill was paid; plaintiff testified bills were paid | Written-off/adjusted portions were not actually paid; plaintiff failed to lay foundation under Arthur/Wills to admit unpaid/discounted amounts | Reversed in part: trial court abused discretion admitting written-off portions without proper foundation; those portions are not recoverable without foundation |
| 4. Appropriate remedy for improper admission of written-off amounts | If error, court can remit excessive verdict or order new trial on damages | Amount awarded includes improperly admitted sums; ask remittitur to paid-only amounts or new trial | Remanded: trial court must order remittitur for the written-off portions if plaintiff consents; if plaintiff refuses, reverse and remand for new trial on damages only |
Key Cases Cited
- Wrobel v. City of Chicago, 318 Ill. App. 3d 390 (Ill. App. Ct.) (duty/breach may be decided as a matter of law when no genuine factual dispute exists)
- Arthur v. Catour, 216 Ill. 2d 72 (Ill.) (plaintiff may present full billed medical charges to jury but must meet foundational reasonableness requirements)
- Wills v. Foster, 229 Ill. 2d 393 (Ill.) (clarifies application of collateral-source rule and foundational proof for discounted/written-off medical bills)
- Peterson v. Lou Bachrodt Chevrolet Co., 76 Ill. 2d 353 (Ill.) (historic rule that free medical services were not recoverable; considered in context of modern approaches)
- Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke, Bosselman & Weaver, 222 Ill. 2d 218 (Ill.) (if plaintiff refuses remittitur, the proper alternative is a new trial limited to damages)