Return to Table of Contents

X. Collateral Source Rule

Historically, Alaska's collateral source rule provided that benefits received from a plaintiff's insurance policy would not be deducted from a claim against the defendant. For example, where a plaintiff sustained $100,000 in damages and was paid $50,000 by his or her insurance company, the plaintiff was still entitled to recover the full $100,000 from the defendant. Tolan v. Era Helicopters, Inc., 699 P.2d 1267 (Alaska 1985) (precluding discussion or credit for collateral benefits received for the same injury). This common law scheme was partially modified by the 1986 Tort Reform statute. See AS 09.17.070. Under this statute, a defendant is entitled to claim certain collateral benefits as an offset after the court or jury has rendered an award.

An offset is allowed only if the claimant has received compensation for the same injury from a collateral source that does not have a right of subrogation. Additionally, the collateral benefits cannot be used for offset where the benefit is one that under federal law cannot be reduced or offset, is a life insurance policy, or was a "gratuitous benefit." Id. For example, offset was allowed for payments by a fund providing compensation to oil spill victims that did not have a right of subrogation. Chenega Corp. v. Exxon Corp., 991 P.2d 769 (Alaska 1999). Similar deductions are available for payments made by the tortfeasor's insurer. Liimatta v. Vest, 43 P.3d 310 (Alaska 2002). Trial court rulings have suggested offsets would be available for benefits received under state or federal disability programs or statutes.

Worker's Compensation payments are not a collateral benefit for which offset is allowed. Rather, the worker's compensation carrier has a statutory lien against recoveries in a third-party action arising out of the same accident. AS 23.30.015.