fundamentals the famed football coach that somebody emphasized fundamentals if you have a championship team in green bay the issues presented the central issue presented today is about fundamentals of evidence there are three central fundamental rules of law that apply with regard to the issue before the court rule number one burden of proof the person presenting a party presenting a contract is the basis of the claim has the burden of proving the contract fundamental rule number two authentication exhibit submitted into this positive hearing before each trial court and a bench trial must be authenticated if they are not offended hated they do not come into evidence and cannot be considered by the court rule number three fundamental foundation evidence rule eight zero three six describes the elements for laying the foundation for a business record such as a contract will evidence rule to all of them speaks the certification which is an alternative that the defendant and its insurance company united equitable failed to authenticate the contract agreement which was attached as an exhibit to their counter claim for a set off and in their presentation of evidence to the trial  release you did not lay an evidentiary foundation for the mission of the document patric release as a business record and so the judge had no evidence before him in terms of considering that contract no  contract which explained the underlying contract saying that they settled the property damage claim you have the medical pay plain for five thousand dollars but the release document was not authentic eighteen and the state farm affidavit other than it was it is what was signed by the parties so i would rely on what i submitted that was in pounds or argument to my my objection that the documented need should be authenticated unfairness of this way of doing business where the insurance company for the got ball driver negotiated the settlement of both the property damage and the medical paintings because you can see by the arithmetic in the settlement agreement with state farm they saved about four thousand dollars or so in their negotiation off of this the submitted subrogation amounts and then they come before the trial court to ask for an additional five thousand dollars set off with regard to medical payments so they've obtained an overnight thousand dollar discount it with regard to payment of the claim based on a jury verdict of twenty five thousand dollars so something is a little bit amiss in the presentation i have had the opportunity to farm contract there was both subrogation and reimbursement rights segregation rights that were exercised in regard to the to the release agreement were premature not right they were still incurring with regard to the property it patrick comes into evidence first considered to be in evidence state farm did not have the right to negotiate or waive because it was not yet a vested right it was in kuwait not ripen until he acted until my client the nurse was paid money damages for medical payment by the other side so that's why we're saying that really what i was saying when i cited the strong vs halverson case that i was really trying to say to the court is that state farm my nurse in terms of that in terms of been negotiated out if there had not been a settlement supposed agreement in subrogation if the end of the case the jury verdict gets paid then state farm comes back to the point to the nurse and says i want reimbursement under the contracted the state farm contract for the five thousand dollars but she says wait a minute state farm you'll need an attorney feel under the common fund doctrine of one third so instead of having to pay state farm back five thousand dollars on reimbursement she would pay state farm back thirty five hundred dollars or less so in this sense the way this matter was negotiated prematurely the stay for not getting the vested rights th medical pay she was harmed in that way edition so that was arguing with regard to the concept of the application of subrogation rights the other item that we have raised in our brief was that these medical payments must be considered  collateral source payments that my nurse client paid force of the she would be protected if she were harmed so she pays for that coverage she gets that coverage and then the united equitable into guard take advantage of that coverage in the suburb geishas settlement and she is paid the premiums and they get the advantage of her payment of premiums and that is there some were say is a technicality if they get advantage that they get take advantage of her of her  considered medical pay would have prevented this the set off  one of three things they could go after mr gold are personally they could write them off completely or they could sit back and wait for this case to come to trial for the week on file and then click on the back out they chose option t with defendants insurance company for repayment of that to my house they found has not come after the point of asking for that five thousand dollars in fact the affidavit by the strongmen who was the attorney for state farm in the suburb ation action for state farm stated that there's right o two fronts the player you have to fight with your own insurance company water and should not be allowed that's why this is this comes after the trial and courts all the time make adjustments off the jury verdicts for various reasons and i don't see where this should be any different really knows this to make sure i understand  as it is this is the same sense as if let's say there was property damage to her three thousand dollars and they paid that they would be able to claim three thousand dollars ok the negotiations happened a year before the trial between state farm and nine apple they settled the property damage and that pay a good year before this case ever came trial what's the what was that men pay the five thousand  saw that i'm sorry and she said you know what i'm used to talking about it so that five thousand was negotiated repayment at least a year before the trial ok got partly right there he was talking about how this is an important thing for thirty five hundred probably damage or whatever it might be involve another attorney in the case and then an issue may or may not know there are five thousand or five years to file a subrogation i contract case versus two years so they can come in at the last minute you know and stretch the case out longer so that's just been my experience from being on both sides display a benefit that if the stress companies can work this out all right he hires me as his attorney we try the case i file the same motion and say five thousand dollars the first is paid by our insurance company we're entitled to five thousand dollars set up that is the platter a source  is not allowed because she's the head of herself here the court fees we get off we don't pay anything where we dose zero she gets she pay for her five thousand coverage and we get credit for that five thousand without paying a dollar for because they gave us a farm five thousand dollars it's not like their game of tennis they're going to five thousand our credit for nothing they didn't pay five thousand dollars to state farm for their that pay for the five thousand hours of medical bills that w fifty thousand dollars the difference between what his insurance company should pay of the twenty what they have paid which is five yet the five the fifteen together that's twenty thousand dollars total which adult are still of five thousand dollars a person her for that five thousand or so that five thousand disappears she doesn't know it's a benefit to her she gets what's left of the policy which is fifteen would be the same result as if she did have a five thousand dollars payment from  to look at the public a lot of the judgment yes it's a reduction but it's not a reduction of her award should get twenty she would get twenty five thousand that's the jury's verdict i think we can all agree that was the third the policies for twenty the first claim was it's state funded have subrogation right which in his brief he's got a copy of the policy section three that says we are segregated to the extent of our payments so i don't know that argument  hostess expenses why isn't it right but he hasn't proved that in terms of presenting his well let's assume for the moment i'm not sure what in a post traumatic this kind of not sure that this is the same kind of not normally what happens with medical payment is that in this case there would be twenty five thousand dollars per day and stay five we come to this whole insurance say under our rights of reimbursement you always the five thousand dollars meant that jury were to say the amount of medical bills that apply to this injury are one thousand dollars not one thousand say five percent normally going to try to negotiate something where there to be liability on the responsibility for the bills it's not yet been thousand dollars which is short of the amount the state farm paid we don't know that five thousand dollars includes medical pay we do not know that that was the benefit of the bargain the state farm has there's a shortage of almost five thousand dollars in their determination but they let me ask if this could not bargain with another insurance company from his soldiers subrogation because they did not possess them yet but that was back to my earlier question about the order because he's such a nice crack let's assume he pays five thousand bucks to the soldier