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
Collateral Source Rule Reform: (1987)
Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments.  The collateral source rule reform in civil tort cases did not violate the right ...
Alabama
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 337 (1986)
Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments.  Provides for awards to be offset, less any amount paid by the claimant to secure...
Alaska


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
Legal Services Advertising in the United States – 2020-2024
In 2024, it is estimated that more than $2.5 billion were spent on more than 26.9 million ads across all analyzed mediums for legal services or solici...
Smith Jr. v. Terumo BCT, Inc.
(Co. App., filed March 3, 2025): Arguing that traditional tort-law principles preclude medical monitoring as a claim or remedy without present physica...
Colorado
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
(U.S., filed December 4, 2024): Arguing that foreseeability is not a substitute for proximate causation. The petition is emblematic of numerous lawsui...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Gilead Tenofovir Cases, Gilead Sciences v. Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco
(Ca., filed November 4, 2024): Arguing that the novel duty to innovate recognized by the Court of Appeal would flood the judiciary and burden manufact...
California
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Moheball v. Hayes
(N.C. App., filed October 7, 2024): Arguing that statutory limits on noneconomic damages respond to a rise in pain and suffering awards and their unpr...
North Carolina
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Piasa Armory, LLC. v. Raoul
(Il., filed October 7, 2024): Arguing against the elimination of the state’s intrastate forum non conveniens doctrine. Intrastate forum non conveniens...
Illinois
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Sommerville v. Union Carbide Corp.
(4th Circ., filed September 30, 2024): Arguing that Article III standing is a threshold requirement for all claims in federal court.  Medical-monitori...
4th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Gardner v. Norman
(UT., filed August 23, 2024): Arguing that chargemaster rates and other list prices set by healthcare providers, but rarely paid and not actually rece...
Utah
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal Accountability and Nevada Justice Association vs. Uber Technologies, Inc.
(Nv., filed August 8, 2024): Arguing that judicial review of ballot initiative petitions is limited to the requirements of NRS 295.009 and Article 19 ...
Nevada
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
The Key School Inc. v. Bunker; Board of Education of Hartford County v. John Doe
(Md., filed August 7, 2024): Arguing that reviving time-barred claims undermines Maryland’s civil justice system and creates turmoil for busines...
Maryland
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided



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.