Collateral Source

The collateral source rule bars the admissibility of evidence at trial to show that a plaintiff’s losses have been compensated from other sources, such as the plaintiff’s insurance or workers compensation. “Collateral source” refers to damages awarded to plaintiffs for inflated medical expenses that were never actually incurred.

The Problem

The collateral source rule keeps important information relevant to the determination of damages from reaching the jury. It allows plaintiffs to be compensated twice for the same injury.

ATRA’s Position

ATRA supports permitting the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments at trial or requiring awards to be offset by the amount paid to plaintiffs by collateral sources, less the amount paid by the plaintiff to secure the benefit. Advancing legislation to allow actual evidence of the medical expenses incurred will bring transparency to damage awards for medical bills.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Collateral Source
Phantom Damages Reform – S.B. 251
Addresses both the definition of recoverable damages and the evidence admissible to establish the value of medical treatment. Establishes that the ...
Montana
Phantom Damages Reform – S.F. 2338 (2020)
Limits the evidence offered to prove past medical expenses to the amounts actually paid to satisfy the bills that have been satisfied and the amounts ...
Iowa
Medical Liability Reform- Collateral Source Rule: H.B. 2292 (2006)
Provided for the admissibility of evidence that the plaintiff has already been compensated for the injury from any source except for the assets of the...
Washington
Phantom Damages: S.B. 789 (2015)
Provides for the admissibility of the full amount paid as the full amount in question regarding medical bills used for damages calculations.  It also ...
Oklahoma
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 323 (1987): Or. Rev. Stat. § 18.580.
Permits a judge to reduce awards for collateral source payments, excluding life insurance and other death benefits, benefits for which plaintiff have ...
Oregon
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 629 (2003): 63 O.S. § 1-1708.1D.
Permits Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments, unless the court determines the payment is subject to subrogation or any ...
Oklahoma
Collateral Source Rule Reform: Am Sub SB 80 (2004); ORC Ann. 2305.131.

Provides that collateral source benefits can be introduced into evidence, except under certain circumstances.

Ohio
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 281 (2003).
Provides for awards in medical malpractice cases to be offset by collateral source payments, unless the source of the reimbursement has a mandatory se...
Ohio
Collateral Source Rule Reform: HB 350 (1996).
Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments, including workers’ compensation benefits, but only if there is no right of subrog...
Ohio
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 9351 (1986).

Provides for awards to be offset by collateral source payments.

New York


Collateral Source News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Collateral Source

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Collateral Source
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Blade v. Sig Saurer
(E.D. Pa., filed April 6, 2026): Arguing that the court should grant Sig Saurer’s motion for reconsideration because Mallory upends the jurisdictiona...
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Suquilanda v. Skyway Roofing, Inc.
(Ma., filed March 18, 2026): Urging the court to decline to recognize a new cause of action permitting employees of a subcontractor to sue a contract...
Massachusetts
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Letter Urging Veto or Amendments to House Bill 449 / Senate Bill 229 in Virginia
...
Corporate Flight from Delaware: The Impact of Escalating Shareholder Litigation and Legal Uncertainty
Unpredictable court rulings and a wave of lawyer-driven, profit-seeking litigation are destabilizing Delaware’s historic dominance for corporat...
Delaware
New York Local Legal Services Advertising 2024-2025
Trial lawyers and aggregators increasingly spend large sums of money on television, digital, and print advertising to recruit new clients. In 2025, i...
New York
Murphy v. Rio Rancho Center
(New Mex. Ct. App., filed March 5, 2026): Arguing that the double-digit punitive multipliers likely violate due process. The U.S. Supreme Court has s...
New Mexico
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Monsanto v. Durnell
(U.S., filed March 2, 2026): Arguing that requirements for herbicide labeling should not be made case-by-case in litigation sparked by a flawed IARC ...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Cowan v. Dr. Slann et.al.
(N.D., filed February 23, 2026): Arguing that reasonable limits on medical liability improve the health care system for doctors and patients and Nort...
North Dakota
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Oregon Local Legal Services Advertising 2021-2025
Trial lawyers and aggregators increasingly spend large sums of money on television, digital,and print advertising to recruit new clients. In 2025, it...
Oregon
The Junk Science Playbook
The Machine That Sparks and Supports Mass Tort LitigationIntroduction and Executive SummaryMass tort litigation is a sprawling, profit-driven...



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.