In Rattenni v. Grainger, 298 S.C. 276, 277, 379 S.E.2d 890, 890 (1989), the identical question presented in this case was decided by our supreme court. In that case, the decedent was killed in an automobile collision proximately caused by the defendant driver. Prior to trial, the plaintiff settled with the UIM carrier for the full amount of the UIM coverage available, and the UIM carrier waived any right of subrogation it might have possessed. Following a jury verdict against the at-fault driver which greatly exceeded his liability insurance coverage, the at-fault driver asked the court for a set-off of the amount paid in UIM benefits against the verdict. The circuit court declined, ruling that the decedent's UIM coverage was a collateral source. The Court agreed, concluding, "We find no persuasive reason to distinguish underinsurance proceeds from other insurance proceeds that are subject to the collateral source rule." Id. 298 S.C. at 278, 379 S.E.2d at 890.