Why the first number is rarely the real number
Insurance adjusters routinely open negotiations with a conservative figure, expecting a counteroffer. Accepting that first offer typically closes the claim permanently — there's generally no going back to ask for more later, even if additional injuries or costs surface afterward.
A filing deadline that didn't survive scrutiny
The MCARE Act included a seven-year statute of repose — an outer deadline for filing a medical malpractice claim regardless of when the injury was actually discovered. In a closely divided decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck that deadline down as unconstitutional, removing a hard cutoff that had previously barred some claims from being filed at all, no matter how diligently a patient had pursued them.
Part of a broader pattern
This ruling fits alongside Pennsylvania's constitutional resistance to limiting recovery against private defendants more generally. Between the ban on capping compensatory damages and this rejection of a hard filing deadline, Pennsylvania's courts have repeatedly declined to let legislative limits curtail what an injured plaintiff can ultimately recover or even bring to court.
Why this context matters when evaluating an offer
An insurer's early valuation of a malpractice claim may have been built around assumptions about filing deadlines and other limits that have since shifted. It's worth confirming that any offer reflects the current legal landscape, not an outdated assumption about what claims could or couldn't proceed.
The baseline still applies
None of this changes the ordinary approach to a first offer: compare it against a complete, well-documented account of your actual damages before deciding whether to accept or counter, since the decision is generally final once made.