---
title: "Medical Billing Expert Witness’ Report Precluded Because it Reviews the Amounts Previously Billed"
meta:
  "og:description": "Analysis submitted by the medical billing expert witness is not relevant because the measure of damages for past medical damages is the amount accepted by the provider as payment in full and that amount is readily available"
  "og:title": "Medical Billing Expert Witness’ Report Precluded Because it Reviews the Amounts Previously Billed"
  author: "Expert Witness Profiler"
  description: "Analysis submitted by the medical billing expert witness is not relevant because the measure of damages for past medical damages is the amount accepted by the provider as payment in full and that amount is readily available"
---

# Medical Billing Expert Witness’ Report Precluded Because it Reviews the Amounts Previously Billed

Posted on November 26, 2024 by Expert Witness Profiler

This matter stems from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on May 21, 2023 when the vehicle driven by Plaintiff, Juwan Brown, and occupied by his parents, Clarence and Tawanna Brown, was struck by a commercial vehicle driven by Dashawn Brooks.

The commercial vehicle was owned by Penske Truck Leasing Co. and leased by Defendant Mayflower Laundry & Linen. As a result of the accident, Plaintiffs have alleged that they have sustained various injuries and damages.

The Defendant retained [Yvonne Dailey](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Yvonne-Dailey/1545068) “to coordinate an analysis of the billing and reimbursement dates for services provided to [Plaintiffs] due to” the motor vehicle accident at issue in this case.

In her report, Dailey compared the amounts charged for Plaintiffs’ medical care arising from the accident with the amounts permitted by the fee schedules under the New Jersey Personal Injury Protection (“NJ PIP”) fee schedule and Pennsylvania’s “Act 6” schedule. However, Dailey’s analysis did not include the amounts that were actually paid for the services.

Plaintiffs challenged the reliability, relevance, and fit of Dailey’s opinion, asserting that her testimony should be precluded under [Federal Rule of Evidence 403](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_403#:~:text=The%20court%20may%20exclude%20relevant,or%20needlessly%20presenting%20cumulative%20evidence.). Plaintiffs argued that the charges reflected in Dailey’s report “have already been reconciled with Plaintiffs’ health insurers [and] will be presented to the jury in the form of liens which will be _sanitarily_ presented in compliance with the collateral source rule.

## **Medical Billing Expert Witness**

[Yvonne Daile](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Yvonne-Dailey/1545068)y has over 20 years of experience in the medical billing and coding field. As a Certified Professional Coder (CPC) and Certified Professional Biller (CPB), she helps clients understand the importance of accurate coding and documentation in the reimbursement process.

Her specialties include Infectious Disease, Family Practice, Endocrinology, Interventional Radiology, Internal Medicine, OB-Gyn, Chiropractic, Mental Health, Podiatry, Substance Abuse, Oncology, Hematology, Ophthalmology, Dental (medical side), and Orthopedics.

[Want to know more about the challenges Yvonne Dailey has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.](https://app.expertwitnessprofiler.com/order/add?eId=1545068)  

## **Discussion by the Court**

The defense expert created spreadsheets identifying the charges from Plaintiffs’ medical providers, and opining as to the allowable amounts under NJ PIP and Act 6 for each charge. However, as Plaintiffs pointed out, Plaintiffs’ health and auto insurers have already paid for the treatment which Dailey analyzed.

Under Pennsylvania law, “if the exact amount of [past medical] damages has been decided, or payment has been made and accepted in full, the Plaintiff’s recovery is limited to that amount and there is no issue for the factfinder to determine.”

Plaintiffs asserted that Dailey’s report reviews the amounts previously billed which have already been paid and Defendants did not dispute this characterization. Because the measure of damages for past medical damages is the amount accepted by the provider as payment in full and that amount is readily available, the Court concluded that Dailey’s analysis is not relevant to any issue the jury must decide and would not aid the jury.

## **Held**

The Court granted the Plaintiffs’ motion to preclude the testimony of Yvonne Dailey.

## **Key Takeaways**

Under Pennsylvania law, “if the exact amount of [past medical] damages has been decided, or payment has been made and accepted in full, the Plaintiff’s recovery is limited to that amount and there is no issue for the factfinder to determine.”

Because the measure of damages for past medical damages is the amount accepted by the provider as payment in full and that amount is readily available, the Court concluded that Dailey’s analysis is not relevant to any issue the jury must decide and would not aid the jury. Therefore, Dailey’s analysis was precluded.

Please refer to the blog previously published about this case:

[Nursing Expert Witness’ Opinions on the Propriety of Treatment Recommendations Admitted](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/nursing-expert-witness-opinions-on-the-propriety-of-treatment-recommendations-admitted)

## **Case Details:**

---

## **You Might Also Like**

![Intellectual Property Expert&#39;s Opinion on Misappropriation Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T205412.117.jpg) [**Intellectual Property Expert’s Opinion on Misappropriation Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/medical-billing-expert-witness-report-precluded-because-it-reviews-the-amounts-previously-billed/intellectual-property-experts-opinion-on-misappropriation-excluded)![Automotive Industry Expert&#39;s Testimony on Pricing Practices Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T191143.335.jpg) [**Automotive Industry Expert’s Testimony on Pricing Practices Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/medical-billing-expert-witness-report-precluded-because-it-reviews-the-amounts-previously-billed/automotive-industry-experts-testimony-on-pricing-practices-excluded)![Consumer Credit Expert Allowed to Opine on Mixed Files](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T160600.039.jpg) [**Consumer Credit Expert Allowed to Opine on Mixed Files**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/medical-billing-expert-witness-report-precluded-because-it-reviews-the-amounts-previously-billed/consumer-credit-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-mixed-files)![Appraisal Expert&#39;s Testimony on Deceptiveness Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-11T194055.299.jpg) [**Appraisal Expert’s Testimony on Deceptiveness Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/medical-billing-expert-witness-report-precluded-because-it-reviews-the-amounts-previously-billed/appraisal-experts-testimony-on-deceptiveness-excluded)![Psychology Expert Allowed to Opine on EMDR Therapy](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-11T153456.164.jpg) [**Psychology Expert Allowed to Opine on EMDR Therapy**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/medical-billing-expert-witness-report-precluded-because-it-reviews-the-amounts-previously-billed/psychology-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-emdr-therapy)