Subrogatioin on Medical Expense Claims: The Double Recovery Myth and the Feasibility of Anti-Subrogation Laws
![handle is hein.journals/dlr96 and id is 591 raw text is: I ARTICLES]
Subrogation on Medical Expense Claims:
The Double Recovery Myth and the
Feasibility of Anti-Subrogation Laws
Roger M. Baron*
Subrogation is a windfall to the insurer. It plays no part in rate
schedules . .. .
Edwin W. Patterson1
I. Introduction
Subrogation enables an insurer who has indemnified an insured
to stand in the shoes of the insured on the insured's claim for com-
pensation against a third party, usually a tortfeasor. Ideally, the in-
sured enjoys the benefit of receiving prompt indemnification for loss
with the risk of ultimate recovery from the tortfeasor falling upon
the insurer, who has been subrogated to the rights of the insured.2
The doctrine of subrogation is of equitable origin,3 and rights of sub-
rogation have been honored without substantial controversy in mat-
* Associate Professor of Law, University of South Dakota School of Law, B.S., J.D.,
University of Missouri at Columbia. The author wishes to thank Rober E. Driscoll, Il1, Profes-
sor and Dean, University of South Dakota School of Law and Lois Gregoire for their
assistance.
1. EDWIN W. PATTERSON, ESSENTIALS OF INSURANCE LAW 151 (2d ed. 1957).
2. See generally ROBERT E. KEETON & ALAN 1. WIDISS, INSURANCE LAW § 3.10 (1988).
3. Id.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/dlr96&div=32&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
Subrogatioin on Medical Expense Claims: The Double Recovery Myth and the Feasibility of Anti-Subrogation Laws
Subrogatioin on Medical Expense Claims: The Double Recovery Myth and the Feasibility of Anti-Subrogation Laws