269 So. 3d 1173
La. Ct. App.2019Background
- On July 9, 2014 Joseph McCloskey, Matthew Squyres and Allen Roberts were rear‑ended; liability was conceded and damages/causation reserved for trial.
- Five‑day bench trial concluded in December 2017; DMA (a nonparty PPO) moved to quash a subpoena seeking billing/payment records and witness testimony; trial court granted the motion in Jan. 2018 on collateral‑source grounds.
- Trial court awarded sizable past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and general damages to the plaintiffs; one plaintiff settled post‑trial and is not on appeal.
- Lloyd’s of London (excess insurer) appealed, arguing the trial court erred by quashing DMA’s subpoena and by awarding McCloskey future pain‑management expenses; plaintiffs answered, contesting lost‑wage, prescription, and general‑damage rulings.
- Appellate court dismissed Lloyd’s untimely challenge to the Jan. 31, 2018 subpoena ruling as an independent appeal, then reviewed merits of the remaining assignments and plaintiffs’ cross‑claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appealability/timeliness of Jan. 31, 2018 order granting DMA's motion to quash | Plaintiffs: Lloyd’s failed to timely seek review and waived right to appeal that discovery order | Lloyd’s: order is final/appealable and can be raised on appeal of judgment | Appeal of the Jan. 31 order was untimely and dismissed; Lloyd’s cannot raise it here |
| DMA subpoena/collateral‑source evidence (admissibility of DMA billing/payment info) | Plaintiffs: collateral‑source rule bars probing DMA’s payment arrangements; DMA’s motion was proper | Lloyd’s: needed DMA witness/docs to challenge billed amounts and discounts | Trial court properly excluded DMA testimony/docs under collateral‑source rule (review of that order dismissed as untimely) |
| Recoverability of past medical expenses (including amounts billed by DMA) | Plaintiffs: billed amounts (including DMA‑funded procedures) are proven and recoverable as special damages | Lloyd’s: DMA billing/discount information should reduce recoverable medical damages | Appellate court found reasonable factual basis for award; billed amounts proven and recoverable; no manifest error |
| Future pain‑management for McCloskey (effect of discharge for cocaine) | Plaintiffs: treating physician recommends lifelong pain‑management visits; positive drug test does not negate future need | Lloyd’s: McCloskey discharged for cocaine, so future pain treatment is unwarranted | Court credited treating physician; future pain‑management award is reasonably supported and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Kaiser v. Hardin, 953 So.2d 802 (La. 2007) (standard for reviewing special damages)
- Watson v. Hicks, 172 So.3d 655 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2015) (full award of proven medical expenses absent bad faith)
- Stobart v. State through Dept't of Transp. & Dev., 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (appellate review requires assessing reasonableness of factfinder’s conclusion)
- Levy v. Lewis, 219 So.3d 1150 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2017) (plaintiff must prove injuries/treatment were caused by accident to recover medical expenses)
- Reck v. Stevens, 373 So.2d 498 (La. 1979) (standard for reviewing general damages; trial court has great discretion)
- Burch v. SMG, Schindler Elevator Corp., 191 So.3d 652 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2016) (trial court has broad discretion in lost‑earnings determinations)
- Guillory v. Lee, 16 So.3d 1104 (La. 2009) (trial court’s factual determinations on quantum entitled to great deference)