A. Upon the trial of any civil action arising from personal injury, the actual amounts paid for any services in the treatment of the injured party, including doctor bills, hospital bills, ambulance service bills, drug and other prescription bills, and similar bills shall be the amounts admissible at trial, not the amounts billed for such expenses incurred in the treatment of the party. If, in addition to evidence of payment, a party submits a signed statement acknowledged by the medical provider or an authorized representative or sworn testimony that the provider will accept the amount paid as full payment of the obligations, the statement or testimony shall be admitted into evidence. The statement or testimony shall be part of the record as an exhibit but need not be shown to the jury. If a medical provider has filed a lien in the case for an amount in excess of the amount paid, then the bills in excess of the amount paid, but not more than the amount of the lien, shall be admissible. B. If no payment has been made, the Medicare reimbursement rates in effect when the personal injury occurred, not the amounts billed, shall be admissible if, in addition to evidence of nonpayment, a party submits a signed statement acknowledged by the medical provider or an authorized representative or sworn testimony that the provider will accept payment at the Medicare reimbursement rate less cost of recovery as provided in Medicare regulations as full payment of the obligation. The statement or testimony shall be admitted into evidence and shall be part of the record as an exhibit
but need not be shown to the jury. If a medical provider has filed a lien in the case for an amount in excess of the Medicare rate, then the bills in excess of the amount of the Medicare rate, but not more than the amount of the lien, shall be admissible. C. If no bills have been paid, or no statement acknowledged by the medical provider or sworn testimony as provided in subsections A and B of this section is provided to the opposing party and listed as an exhibit by the final pretrial hearing, then the amount billed shall be admissible at trial subject to the limitations regarding any lien filed in the case. D. This section shall apply to civil actions arising from personal injury filed on or after November 1, 2015. Added by Laws 2011, c. 198, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2011. Amended by Laws 2015, c. 337, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2015.
Notes of Decisions
Beason v. I. E. Miller Servs., Inc., 441 P.3d 1107 (Okla. 2019).
· cites it 6× “§ 702, and also that their testimony was prejudicial; (3) evidence on the issue of warranties covering costs for future repair of prosthetics should have been allowed; (4) the jury should have been informed whether personal-injury awards for personal damages are subject to state…”
Barrios v. Haskell Cnty. Pub. Facilities Auth., 432 P.3d 233 (Okla. 2018).
“3d 736 , 752 (discussing "the power of the Legislature to modify or abrogate the common law by statute" within the context of the interplay between 12 O.S. § 3009.1 and the Collateral Source Rule).”
Lee v. Bueno, 2016 OK 97 (Okla. 2016).
· cites it 140× “Petitioner moved for a declaratory judgment holding 12 O.S. 2011 § 3009.1, a statute limiting the admissibility of certain types of evidence, was unconstitutional.”
Beason v. I. E. Miller Servs., Inc., 2019 OK 28 (Okla. 2019).
· cites it 3× “§ 702, and also that their testimony was prejudicial; (3) evidence on the issue of warranties covering costs for future repair of prosthetics should have been allowed; (4) the jury should have been informed whether personal-injury awards for personal damages are subject to state…”
Christian v. Lee, 2016 OK 115 (Okla. 2016).
· cites it 8× “1, found 12 O.S. § 3009.1 to be unconstitutional because it: 1) is a special law in violation of Okla.”
O'Dell v. Baker (E.D. Okla. 2023).
· cites it 4× “2016) (discussing Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 3009.1 ). Section 3009.”
Jean Dedmon v. Debbie Steelman, 535 S.W.3d 431 (2017).
“715 (2016) (stating that the plaintiff may only introduce evidence of “actual cost” paid for services); Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 3009.1 (2011 & Supp.”
Klintworth v. Valley Forge Ins. Co. (N.D. Okla. 2021).
· cites it 2× “On March 20, 2017, Wheeler replied that the EOBs were “helpful in determining the amount of medical expenses paid under [ Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 3009.1 ], i.e., the amount of medical expenses that [plaintiff] is ‘legally entitled to recover’.”
Willis v. Progressive Direct Ins. Co. (W.D. Okla. 2023).
· cites it 2× “See Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 3009.1 . That statute provides, in relevant part: Upon the trial of any civil action arising from personal injury, the actual amounts paid for any services in the treatment of the injured party, including doctor bills, hospital bills, ambulance service…”
Andrew v. Depani-sparkes, 2021 OK CIV APP 41 (Okla. Civ. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “14 ¶34 Here, we need not decide this issue because, even if it was error to admit the full amount of the medical bills, Mercy has not shown the admission of the evidence was prejudicial so as to require relief.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 3009.1(A) — 1 case
Lee v. Bueno, 2016 OK 97 (Okla. 2016).
“Petitioner moved for a declaratory judgment holding 12 O.S. 2011 § 3009.1, a statute limiting the admissibility of certain types of evidence, was unconstitutional.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.