Delfino R. Olivas, Aetna Life and Casualty Company, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the rationale behind the collateral source rule does not apply in a situation where the collateral source is the defendant himself
• noting that Arizona law treats lien rights under its workers’ compensation act “as if they were subrogation rights”
• proceeds from insurance policy were not collateral benefit because defendant was responsible for payment of all the premiums
• proceeds from in surance policy were not collateral benefit because defendant was responsible for payment of all the premiums
• “If this interpretation [that the employer’s insurance carrier waived its right to reimbursement] is adopted, the statutory objective of precluding double recovery by the employee will still be accomplished.”
• damages against government under Federal Tort Claims Act were reduced by payments to plaintiff under workmen’s compensation policy paid for by government

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).