My response:
There is no rule or law in this regard. Many years ago, it used to be a "benchmark" of sorts. However, with the evolution of insurance company regulations, and the laws themselves lending to other areas of claims, the "3 times medicals" rule-of-thumb has pretty much gone the way of the Dodo Bird - - it's extinct.
For example - - two people get into two different accidents, but both are rear-ended.
One innocent driver is 57 years old, retired, and sustains a broken wrist in the accident.
The other innocent driver is 33 years old, a computer programmer, and sustains soft tissue injuries.
Both of the above victims have spent 4,800.00 for their respective medical treatments.
Who's claim has more value? Should the "3 times medical expenses" rule-of-thumb be used for one, or both, or either? Or, should a settlement be fashioned like a glove to reflect the real-world facts of these victims?
Don't cheat yourself. See an attorney for a professional opinion and evaluation of your case, and its particular facts.
IAAL