By: John Livingood, February 21, 2025
A recent opinion by U.S. District Judge Gerald McHugh of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that §1722 of Pennsylvania’s Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law does not bar recovery of future medical expenses in motor vehicle liability cases. The MVFRL, which is codified as 75 Pa. C.S. 1701, et seq., precludes the recovery of damages for medical expenses in cases where these expenses are “paid or payable” by certain types of insurance.
In Morris v. Sutton, the case giving rise to Judge McHugh’s Opinion, the Plaintiff filed an action against the Defendant after he allegedly struck her vehicle. On the basis of §1722 of the MVFRL, the Defendant sought to preclude the Plaintiff from introducing essentially all evidence of past or future medical expenses. The Plaintiff argued that future medical expenses cannot be precluded by §1722, since future medical bills that have not yet been incurred cannot fit within the definition of “payable” under that provision.
According to Judge McHugh, both the existence of insurance coverage for future medical expenses and the applicability of said coverage is speculative. Ultimately, Judge McHugh concluded that, unlike in the case of past medical expenses which can be precisely determined, the possibility of coverage for future medical expenses is impossible to predict and therefore a party’s ability to recover for same is not precluded by the MVFRL. This case follows a recent pattern of cases in Pennsylvania state courts refusing to apply the MVFRL’s various cost containment provisions to future medical benefits.
