# Common-fund doctrine

> The common-fund doctrine says a health plan repaid from your settlement should share the legal fees and costs that produced the money. How it works.

Canonical page: https://accidentclaimfacts.com/glossary/common-fund-doctrine/  
Last reviewed: October 29, 2026 by the Accident Claim Facts editorial team  
General information, not legal advice. Talk to a licensed attorney in your state.

## Quick answer

The common-fund doctrine says that when one person's lawyer creates a recovery that others share in, those others should pay a fair share of the fees and costs it took to get the money. After a crash, it usually comes up when a health plan wants to be repaid from your settlement.

## In a car accident claim

Suppose your health plan paid your crash bills and has a right to subrogation or reimbursement. Your lawyer did the work to win the settlement, and the plan benefits from it. Under the common-fund doctrine, the plan's repayment can be reduced by its share of the fees and costs. Medicare follows a similar idea for its conditional payments: it grants a pro-rata reduction of the amount owed for your lawyer's fees and other costs of getting the settlement.

There are limits. For employer health plans governed by federal ERISA law, the Supreme Court held in *US Airways v. McCutchen* that the plan's own terms govern, and the double-recovery and common-fund rules cannot override a clear reimbursement clause. But when the plan says nothing about the costs of recovery, the common-fund doctrine fills the gap. So the plan's written terms often decide the outcome. Our guide to [medical liens and subrogation](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/money/medical-liens-and-subrogation/) covers repayment in detail, and [contingency fees](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/money/contingency-fees/) explains how the fee itself is worked out.

## Example

> **Example:** An employer health plan paid most of a driver's crash-related medical bills and asks for full repayment from the settlement. The driver's lawyer reads the plan documents, finds they say nothing about legal fees, and asks the plan to reduce its claim by its share of the fees and costs.

## Related terms

- [Subrogation](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/glossary/subrogation/)
- [Made-whole doctrine](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/glossary/made-whole-doctrine/)
- [Self-funded plan](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/glossary/self-funded-plan/)
- [Conditional payment](https://accidentclaimfacts.com/glossary/conditional-payment/)

## FAQ

### Does the common-fund doctrine apply to Medicare?

Medicare has its own rule with a similar effect. When it is repaid from a settlement, it reduces the amount it is owed by a proportional share of the attorney fees and costs of getting the settlement.

### Can a health plan refuse to share the legal fees?

Sometimes. If an ERISA plan's terms clearly require full repayment without a fee reduction, those terms generally govern. If the plan is silent, the common-fund doctrine usually fills the gap.

## Sources

- [Cornell LII, US Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen (2013)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-1285) — plan terms and the common-fund doctrine
- [CMS, Medicare Secondary Payer beneficiary reference guide](https://www.cms.gov/files/document/non-group-health-plan-nghp-medicare-secondary-payer-msp-beneficiary-reference-guide.pdf) — reduction for attorney fees and procurement costs