Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Tri-County Equipment & Leasing, LLC v. Klinke

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 2012No. 55121Published

1ConcurrenceGibbons, J., joined by Cherry, C.J., agrees

The two main issues raised by the parties in this appeal are whether Nevada’s collateral source rule applies to the payment of California workers’ compensation benefits to Klinke and whether it applies to medical provider discounts. I concur with the majority’s decision to reverse the district court judgment. The district court should have addressed California workers’ compensation law since Klinke received California workers’ compensation benefits. While I also concur with footnote 6 in the majority opinion in that *359medical provider discounts appear to reside within the scope of Nevada’s…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Eichel v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Bozeman v. StateSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2004
  3. Acuar v. LetourneauSupreme Court of Virginia · 2000
  4. Wills v. FosterIllinois Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Baptist Healthcare Systems, Inc. v. MillerKentucky Supreme Court · 2005

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API