Collateral Source Rule

Tort damages are designed to be compensatory in nature and make a party whole. The collateral source rule is an exception to this rule. It provides that a wrongdoer is not entitled to have the damages to which he/she is liable reduced by the fact that plaintiff has received or will receive compensation or indemnity for the loss from a collateral source. Washington By Washington v. Barnes Hosp., 897 S.W.2d 611, 619 (Mo. 1995). The reasoning is that the wrongdoer should not benefit by separate, collateral payments made to the person he/she has wronged. 
Missouri has applied the collateral source rule in many different circumstances: workers’ compensation benefits, disability pension benefits, retirement benefits, employer’s medical plan, and sick leave. Most commonly, Missouri courts apply the collateral source rule to prevent defendants from informing juries of insurances policies contracted for and paid for by plaintiffs. See Iseminger v. Holden, 544 S.W.2d 550, 553 (Mo. 1976). 
 

Related Articles

Tortious Interference: “Improper Means”

August 23, 2023

Tortious interference with business expectancies or contractual relations claims are difficult to make. Tortious interference in Missouri has five elements: (1) the plaintiff was involved in a valid business relationship; (2) the defendant was aware of that relationship; (3) the defendant intentionally interfered with that relationship, inducing its termination; (4) the defendant acted without justification; and…

Read More

Abandoned Pleadings

August 2, 2023

Once a pleading — whether it be a petition, answer, etc. —  is amended the prior iteration of the pleading is considered “abandoned.” Unless the subsequent pleading adopts or incorporates the contents of a prior pleading, the abandoned pleadings is largely irrelevant. In no uncertain terms, Missouri courts have described it as a “mere scrap…

Read More

Appealing Dismissals Without Prejudice

July 28, 2023

The default rule is that only judgments on the merits or dismissals with prejudice may be appealed. Dismissals without prejudice mean that the litigant can re-plead and pursue the claims; so, the court of appeals is often reluctant to touch a dismissal without prejudice until the trial court had made a final decision. To that end, there…

Read More

Strict Construction, Implied Authority to Act as Attorney-in-Fact

July 14, 2023

Power of attorney instruments are “strictly construed.” In re Estate of Lambur, 397 S.W.3d 54, 65 (Mo. App. S.D. 2013). While the definition of strict construction varies depending on who you ask, most agree that it calls for a more narrow, literal interpretation of a document. A strict construction, though, does not preclude “implied authority to…

Read More
Scroll to Top