Zaleppa v. Seiwell
9 A.3d 632
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2010Background
- Oct. 29, 2004, Seiwell backed into Zaleppa, causing injuries to the 69-year-old plaintiff.
- Zaleppa filed suit Feb. 6, 2007, seeking medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering; James Seiwell initially co-defendant.
- Liability admitted; May 7–8, 2009 trial on damages only; jury awarded $15,000 ($5,000 future medical expenses; $10,000 for pain and suffering).
- Seiwell moved for post-trial relief to have Medicare and the defendant’s insurer as payees on the verdict or for payment into court until Medicare liens were resolved; the trial court denied these requests.
- Trial court entered judgment for Zaleppa on Oct. 26, 2009; Seiwell appealed challenging MSPA implications and relief sought.
- Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed, holding private parties may not invoke MSPA rights or remedies to assert Medicare’s reimbursement interests or alter judgment satisfaction under Pennsylvania law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does MSPA authorize a private party to assert Medicare’s reimbursement rights? | Seiwell contends MSPA requires protection of Medicare interests by private parties. | Zaleppa argues MSPA rights are government-only; private parties cannot assert Medicare interests. | No; MSPA does not authorize private entities to assert Medicare’s rights. |
| May a private party satisfy a judgment by adding Medicare as a payee or by paying into court pending Medicare lien resolution? | Seiwell seeks to include Medicare as payee or to escrow funds until liens are resolved. | Zaleppa maintains only the judgment's named recipient may be paid, and Medicare cannot be added. | No; Pennsylvania law and MSPA do not authorize such post-judgment relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fanning v. Davne, 795 A.2d 388 (Pa. Super. 2002) (private insurer primary plan; offsetting damages; MSPA context)
- Woods v. Empire Health Choice, Inc., 574 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2009) (MSPA private party lacks government-right to recover)
- Stalley v. Catholic Health Initiatives, 509 F.3d 517 (8th Cir. 2007) (MSPA private party rights not as private attorney general)
- United Seniors Ass'n v. Philip Morris USA, 500 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2007) (MSPA private party limitations on government-rights)
- In re Estate of Romani, 547 Pa. 41, 688 A.2d 703 (1997) (statutory interpretation principles for federal statutes applied to MSPA)
- Council 13, American Federation of State, County and Mun. Employees, AFL-CIO ex rel. Fillman v. Rendell, 604 Pa. 352, 986 A.2d 63 (2009) (statutory interpretation and purpose in Pennsylvania context)