- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Insurance Law
- Date Filed: 02-06-2019
- Case #: A162357
- Judge(s)/Court Below: DeVore, J. for the Court; Lagesen, P.J.; & James, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction on a variety of charges which was affirmed without written discussion, and the state cross-appealed a supplemental judgment. On appeal, Defendant argued (1) that there was insufficient evidence to present a question of reasonableness to the jury, (2) that a medical professional must testify that the charges are reasonable to establish reasonableness, and (3) that the state must provide evidence connecting each expense to a necessary treatment. On cross-appeal, the state assigned error to the trial court's denial of its request for restitution for the amount paid to cover victim medical expenses. The state argued (1) that there was testimony that CareOregon paid at government-regulated rates below the standard, and (2) that a health insurer paying a medical bill indicates the charge's reasonableness. Under ORS 137.106(1)(a), "the court shall enter a judgment or supplemental judgment requiring that the defendant pay the victim restitution in a specific amount that equals the full amount of the victim's economic damages as determined by the court" upon a showing of evidence; and under ORS 31.710(2)(a), "economic damages" are the "objectively verifiable monetary losses including but not limited to reasonable charges necessarily incurred for medical, hospital, nursing and rehabilitative services and other health care services[.]" The Court concluded that the trial court was free to require restitution for medical expenses because CareOregon billed at a rate much lower than standard. Affirmed on appeal; reversed and remanded on cross-appeal.