Helfend v. Southern California Rapid Transit District

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[w]e therefore reaffirm our adherence to the collateral source rule in tort cases”
• noting that applying the collateral source rule ensures \that a person who has invested years of insurance premiums to assure his medical care ... receives the benefits of his thrift\
• noting that applying the collateral source rule ensures “that a person who has invested years of insurance premiums to assure his medical care . . . receives the benefits of his thrift”
• stating without citation that “[t]he collateral source rule expresses a policy judgment in favor of encouraging citizens to purchase and maintain insurance”
• rejecting argument that such damages are punitive and noting that “if the collateral source rule were actually punitive, it could apply only in cases of oppression, fraud, or malice”
• employment compensation benefits were paid for by the employee by receiving lower wages

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).