Fact-Checked: Why Trust Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima Being based in southwest Ohio, our law firm regularly handles personal injury cases in both Ohio and Kentucky. Kentucky and Ohio have some big differences when it comes to personal injury law that can significantly affect case value and even our decision whether to accept a client’s case in one state or the other.
This post is the second in a series focusing on the differences between Ohio and Kentucky personal injury law. This installment will focus on the different rules in Kentucky and Ohio when it comes to damages that an injury victim can recover in their case—both economic damages (medical bills, lost wages, etc.) and non-economic damages (pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life). It will also explain how these rules could affect your personal injury case, depending on where the case is filed.
When pursuing a personal injury claim, the state in which your case is filed can have a significant impact on the types and amounts of damages you may recover. Although Ohio and Kentucky share a border, the two states differ substantially in how they handle damages in personal injury lawsuits—particularly with regard to medical expenses and non-economic damages like pain and suffering.
Below is an overview of key differences that injured parties should be aware of if they are considering filing a personal injury lawsuit in either Ohio or Kentucky.
Billed vs. Accepted Medical Expenses
One of the most significant distinctions between Ohio and Kentucky personal injury law is how each state handles the calculation of medical expenses.
Kentucky: Only The “Billed” Amount is Admissible
In Kentucky, plaintiffs are generally permitted to present evidence of the billed amount of their medical expenses to the jury, regardless of the amount that was ultimately accepted by the medical provider as full payment after health insurance write-offs and deductions. This billed amount is often referred to as the “face value” or “sticker price” of the medical services rendered.
This approach generally benefits plaintiffs, as the higher billed amounts may suggest more extensive treatment and justify a larger damages award. Kentucky’s “collateral source rule” prevents defendants from reducing their liability based on payments made by third parties (also known as collateral sources), such as health insurance companies. In short, a defendant cannot benefit from a plaintiff’s health insurance company paying less than the sticker price of a plaintiff’s medical treatment.
Ohio: Both the “Billed” Amount and the “Accepted” Amount are Admissible
Ohio, by contrast, takes a more restrictive approach. Under Robinson v. Bates, 112 Ohio St.3d 17 (2006), and subsequent rulings, Ohio courts have held that, in addition to the billed amount, juries should be provided the amount accepted by a medical provider as payment in full and let them decide what is the proper measure of medical damages. In most cases, juries elect to use the amount accepted as payment in full.
For example, if a hospital bills $10,000 but accepts $4,000 from the insurance company and the patient’s $1,000 deductible as full payment, the jury at trial gets to see both the $10,000 sticker price and the $5,000 total that was actually paid. This rule is supposedly intended to reflect the actual economic loss suffered by the plaintiff, but it also significantly undervalues the true worth of the treating medical providers’ services and can lead to significantly lower jury awards than in states like Kentucky.
Ohio’s rule has the practical effect of reducing recoverable damages, particularly for insured plaintiffs. Liability insurers use the lower measure of medical expenses to their advantage by making low-ball offers to settle the claim, which makes increases the chances that the case will have to be tried. The plaintiff’s attorney in an Ohio personal injury case has to fund creative and persuasive ways to build up the damages claim in the eyes of both the liability insurer (for purposes of settlement) and the jury at trial.
Non-Economic Damages (Pain and Suffering)
Another important difference between the two states lies in the treatment of non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.
Kentucky: No Cap on Pain and Suffering
Kentucky law does not impose any arbitrary cap on non-economic damages in personal injury cases. This means that a jury in Kentucky is free to award whatever amount it deems appropriate based on the facts of the case and the extent of the plaintiff’s suffering.
This can be particularly important in cases involving catastrophic injuries, where pain and suffering may far exceed the actual economic losses.
Ohio: Caps on Non-Economic Damages
Ohio does impose statutory caps on non-economic damages under Ohio Revised Code § 2315.18. In most personal injury cases, the cap is the greater of:
- $250,000; or
- Three times the amount of economic damages, up to a maximum of $350,000.
Exceptions to the Cap
Ohio law provides limited exceptions to these caps. The non-economic damages cap does not apply if the plaintiff has suffered:
- Permanent and substantial physical deformity, or
- Loss of use of a limb, loss of a bodily organ system, or
- Permanent physical functional injury that permanently prevents the injured person from being able to independently care for self and perform life-sustaining activities.
These exceptions are crucial in serious injury cases, and attorneys in Ohio must be diligent in documenting and demonstrating the qualifying nature of their client’s injuries in order to overcome the statutory limitations on pain and suffering awards.
Strategic Considerations in Border Cases
The differences between Ohio and Kentucky in calculating medical damages and non-economic losses make it essential to carefully consider the jurisdiction in which a personal injury lawsuit is filed—especially for individuals injured near the state line who might have the option to file in either state.
If you or a loved one has been injured and are unsure about how these laws may affect your case, contact the experienced personal injury attorneys at Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima. We serve clients in both Ohio and Kentucky and can provide a strategic, jurisdiction-specific evaluation of your potential claim.