In an opinion drafted by Justice Herndon, the Court considered whether NRS 42.021(2)’s prohibition on a collateral source provider’s right to recover extends to a medical malpractice case that was settled before proceeding to trial. Harper alleged that construing the statute’s plain language would produce an absurd result and that the statute should be interpreted similarly to the California Civil Code the statute was based on. The district court dismissed Harper’s argument, rationalizing that the statute prohibits a payer of collateral source benefits from seeking reimbursement from a medical malpractice plaintiff only when the defendant introduces evidence of those payments. Similarly, the Court reasoned that the plain language analysis is applicable and that it did not make sense to adopt the California Civil Code’s interpretation, affirming the district court’s decision in its entirety.
Martinez, Servando, "Harper v. Copperpoint Mut. Ins. Holding Co., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 33 (May 5, 2022)" (2022). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1494.