The collateral source rule is a rule that says that a debt collector cannot reduce the amount of a debt that is owed by the amount of any payments that the debtor has already received from a collateral source. For example, if a debtor owes $1,000 to a creditor, but the debtor has already received $500 from a collateral source (such as a friend or family member), the debt collector can only collect $500 from the debtor. What are collateral claims? Collateral claims are any claims that a creditor may have against a debtor in addition to the primary claim arising from the underlying transaction. Collateral claims can arise in a number of different situations, but they are most commonly seen in situations where the debtor has given the creditor some form of security for the debt, such as a mortgage or a security deposit. In these cases, the collateral claim gives the creditor a right to seize and sell the security if the debtor defaults on the debt.
What is the collateral source rule in Ohio?
The collateral source rule is a rule that is applied in some jurisdictions, including Ohio, that provides that an injured party's damages should not be reduced by the amount of benefits that the injured party receives from a collateral source, such as insurance. The rationale for the rule is that the benefits received from a collateral source are not a windfall to the injured party, but rather are intended to compensate the injured party for the damages sustained. Is the collateral source rule substantive or procedural? The collateral source rule is a substantive rule. Is Michigan a collateral source state? Yes, Michigan is a collateral source state. This means that if you are injured in an accident, the at-fault party's insurance company will only reimburse you for your actual losses, regardless of whether you have other insurance that covers those losses. What is the collateral source rule in Missouri? The collateral source rule is a common law rule that states that damages recovered by an injured party from a source other than the defendant do not reduce the amount of damages recoverable from the defendant. The rule is based on the principle that the defendant should not benefit from the fact that the plaintiff has another source of compensation for his injuries.
In Missouri, the collateral source rule has been codified in section 537.065 of the Missouri Revised Statutes. The statute states that "evidence of collateral source payments is not admissible to reduce the amount of damages otherwise recoverable by the injured party."
The collateral source rule has been the subject of considerable controversy in recent years. Some critics argue that the rule allows plaintiffs to "double dip" by receiving compensation from both the defendant and from other sources. Others argue that the rule is unfair to defendants because it allows plaintiffs to receive compensation from sources that the defendant did not intend to benefit.
The Missouri Supreme Court has held that the collateral source rule is a rule of evidence, and as such, it is subject to the rules of evidence. In particular, the Court has held that the rule does not apply where the plaintiff has waived his right to privacy with respect to the collateral source payments.