Opinion ID: 862256
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: conclusion

Text: ¶31. For these reasons, this Court adopts the made whole rule of subrogation, because the general intent of subrogation (and the stated intent of the State Health Plan) is to prevent a double recovery by the insured. Until the insured has been fully compensated, there cannot be a double recovery. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the Hinds County Circuit Court, and we render judgment here in favor of Hare. ¶32. REVERSED AND RENDERED. PRATHER, C.J., PITTMAN, P.J., BANKS, McRAE, MILLS AND WALLER, JJ., CONCUR. SULLIVAN, P.J., NOT PARTICIPATING. 1. In Fields, the federal court was sitting in diversity applying Oklahoma law. Later, the Oklahoma Supreme Court specifically held that it would not have allowed enforcement of the subrogation provisions in Fields. Equity Fire & Cas. Co. v. Youngblood, 927 P.2d 572, 575 n.3 (Okla. 1996). 2. Expert testimony estimated the potential value of Franklin's claims as in excess of $400,000. Franklin, 942 S.W.2d at 838.