Analysis:

1. First, the Court affirmed the appellate holding that the original medical bill must be allowed into evidence. An injured party is entitled to recover necessary and reasonable expenses arising from the injury. Wagner v. McDaniels, 9 Ohio St.3d 184 (1984). “Proof of the amount paid or the amount of the bill rendered . . . constitutes prima facie evidence of the necessity and reasonableness of the charges for medical and hospital services.” Id. Additionally this rule is supported by R.C. § 2317.421, which states the same, providing that medical bills are prima facie evidence of the reasonable value of medical services.

   Next, the Court determined that evidence of the partial payment was admissible under the collateral-source rule. Under the collateral-source rule, a plaintiff’s receipt of benefits from sources other than the wrongdoer are deemed irrelevant and immaterial on the issue of damages, so the jury does not advantage the tortfeasor and award less damages to the plaintiff. However, the collateral-source rule does not apply to write-offs (difference between bill and amount accepted) of expenses that are never paid and excludes only evidence of benefits paid. The court reasons that because no one pays write-offs, they cannot possibly be called a payment and do not fall into the collateral-source rule. Therefore, the partial payment accepted as full payment must also be admitted to the jury and as they are both relevant to the reasonable value of medical expenses.

2. Here, the Court ruled that the record shows that even though Landlord had a statutory duty to repair, the state of the repairs was a question for the jury. The jury could have concluded either that the repairs were handled with reasonable diligence, thus excusing the violation or that the statutory duty was breached, establishing negligence per se. Since this is a question for the trier of fact, the appellate court was correct in overruling the directed verdict and remanding for trial.