Although the MCARE Act precludes subrogation against medical malpractice proceeds incurred before trial, an employer is entitled to subrogation against future medical expenses and wage loss.

In this appeal to the Commonwealth Court, the claimant argued that § 508 of the MCARE Act is silent as to subrogation of future medical expenses and wage loss in medical malpractice actions and, therefore, must be construed as a prohibition of subrogation. The court disagreed and dismissed the claimant’s appeal, holding that, while § 508(c) of the MCARE Act disallowed subrogation with respect to workers’ compensation benefits paid up until the time of trial, it did nothing to alter the pre-existing law with regard to future benefits. The court noted that, prior to the passage of the MCARE Act, employers and workers’ compensation carriers were entitled to subrogation with respect to both past and future benefits.

_{Case Law Alerts, 2^nd Quarter, April 1, 2016}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}