The Court of Appeals of Indiana has affirmed a judgment in favor of a collection agency seeking to recover an unpaid medical debt, ruling the defendant waived her arguments on appeal by failing to follow the state’s appellate rules and, even setting the waiver aside, failed to show the trial court got it wrong.
The background: The defendant received medical services from a hospital and signed a financial responsibility form promising to pay any portion of the bill not covered by her insurance.
- After the balance went unpaid, a collection agency, acting on the hospital’s behalf, filed a small claims lawsuit against the defendant seeking $3,501.15 in damages plus attorney fees and costs.
- The defendant’s only defense at trial was that Medicare was responsible for the outstanding debt. The plaintiff initially presented Medicaid evidence to rebut that argument.
- Last September, following a bench trial, the court entered a judgment of $4,501.15 in favor of the plaintiff, which included $1,000 in attorney fees. The defendant appealed.
The ruling: The Appeals Court affirmed the judgment, noting that the defendant, who represented herself on appeal, is held to the same standards as a licensed attorney and must accept the consequences of her actions.
- The Appeals Court found the defendant’s brief deficient in nearly every required section. Her statement of facts contained only a single citation to the record and was “peppered with unsupported argument,” including the line, “Because this is so ridiculous, let us review this a third time,” and an accusation that the trial court’s decision could only be explained by “obvious court bias” in favor of the plaintiff.
- The defendant also accused the trial judge of ruling against her to generate revenue for the court, claimed her constitutional rights were violated, and alleged the plaintiff committed Medicare fraud by collecting the debt. The Appeals Court noted the defendant provided no standard of review, no legal authority, and no evidence in the record to support any of those claims, and ruled she had waived appellate review as a result.
- Even ignoring the waiver, the Appeals Court concluded the appeal failed on the merits. The plaintiff proved the existence of a contract, a breach, and damages. The defendant did not dispute that she signed the financial responsibility agreement, which required her to pay her portion of the bill along with attorney fees for collection, or that she failed to pay the balance.
- While the defendant argued Medicare should have covered the bill, she offered no evidence that Medicare ever accepted a claim or agreed to pay for the services.
- The Appeals Court also denied the defendant’s requests to supplement the record with uncertified letters she claimed showed Medicare was conducting a fraud investigation, ruling the alleged investigation had no bearing on the outcome of the appeal.
