US Admiralty Law and the "collateral source" rule.

[Davidhoy]

Does anyone know about the "collateral source" rule in US Admiralty Law? It seems to suggest that a third party defendant (say, an insurance company) cannot reduce their liability due to any payments the plaintiff may have received from independent sources (his own insurance) that are not paid for by the third party. In effect, it stops the liable third party from profiting from the legitimate coverage bought by the plaintiff with his own money.

Obviously I'm asking due to a personal situation, one that I cannot go into detail about yet. What I am trying to do is find a legal and ethical way to get a truly fair recovery, one that will not leave me in a huge financial hole due to someone else's actions. The legal system seems to largely protect the insurance companies, but this rule in Admiralty law may be a saving grace, if it is indeed applicable to my situation.

And yes, I have spoken with a lawyer, many of them in fact. But I am also doing my own research and due diligence :-).

Thanks,
David.

[JPA Cate]

Hi, Davidhoy,

You might try sending Dockhead a PM. He's well versed in American law. Otherwise, I think you'll need to pay for a maritime lawyer, a specialist in maritime law.

Ann

[Buc210]

The different Federal Circuits treat the Collateral Source Rule in Maritime Cases differently. The Fifth Circuit seems to treat it one way, other circuits another way. I would locate an Admiralty Attorney (with plenty of good reviews) in your area. There is nothing wrong with you doing your own due diligence, but remember, you get what you pay for (If you're not an Attorney). I would be wary of any advice on your situation given out on a non-law site by non-attorneys. Free advice on legal matters is worth as much as you pay for it. (and I'm an Attorney and Professional Captain).

Fair Winds.....