Bass v. Coltelli-Rose

(Filed Oct. 2, 2000)

I dissent from the majority’s interpretation that the contractual language, “claim against ... whoever is liable for ... injuries or damages resulting from ... [the] accident,” includes medical payments coverage and, therefore, that coverage is properly subject to a contingent fee. The lower court correctly interpreted the contractual provisions to mean that “[t]he contingent fees charged by ... [Ms. Coltelli-Rose] on the medical payment recoveries were not covered by the contingent fee contract entered into by either Mabel Bass or Douglass Bass ...,” and ordered Ms.…