March 2013 Newsletters
On March 14, 2013, this classic tale of the underdog prevailing Against great odds was recently replayed in a subrogation context in the case of Simmons Perrine Moyer Berman, PLC v. Coleman which was decided by a federal district court in Iowa. Goliath lost, and State Farm was entitled to recover their Med Pay subrogation interest.
On February 21, 2013, the Arkansas Supreme Court decided the case of Progressive Halcyon Ins. v. Saldivar, 2013 Ark. 69 (Ark. 2013). In that case Progressive issued a motorcycle insurance policy to Brian McCallum that contained accident and healthcare coverage. The policy included a provision for subrogation of payments made for any injury caused by a third party.
A new Minnesota Court of Appeals decision makes clear that timing is everything when it comes to UIM subrogation. In Russell v. Haji-Ali, the Court held that when settling an UM/UIM claim, it must be understand that UM/UIM benefits received by an insured before a verdict in the lawsuit against the tortfeasor constitutes a “collateral source” and that must be applied to reduce any future judgment while benefits paid after the verdict do not.