Recent Case Results
Tort reform initiatives are gaining momentum. As we have reported, several states are currently considering various tort reform initiatives that would cap the amount of damages that plaintiffs can recover in certain personal injury lawsuits, such as those involving allegations of medical malpractice. The latest state to introduce tort reform legislation is Pennsylvania. The proposed Pennsylvania legislation specifically targets Philadelphia, which has been has long been maligned by defendants in the personal injury lawsuits.
Currently, plaintiffs are allowed to litigate their claims in Philadelphia from anywhere in the state, but under the proposed bill, Pennsylvania’s local courts could only hear personal injury cases when the plaintiff is a resident, a corporation is locally headquartered, or the incident occurred in that district.
Pennsylvania is also seeking to reform the way the state handles joint and several liability in personal injury actions. In June 2011, Pennsylvania limited joint and several liability damages to a defendant’s share of the verdict if the defendant was less than 60% liable. Previously, plaintiffs were allowed to recover for 100% of their award from any defendant, even those who were minimally liable.
Other state governments that are considering tort reform include Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina and Texas. For instance, Texas governor Rick Perry wants to limit non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, at $250,000 in medical malpractice lawsuits against doctors and $750,000 for medical malpractice lawsuits against hospitals. Proponents of tort reform believe that limiting recovery in medical malpractice cases will help the nation’s health care system by reducing malpractice insurance costs for doctors and health care providers. Gov. Perry’s personal injury reform initiatives in Texas began in 2003 with the passage of legislation that limited the amount of money a plaintiff could receive in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Tort reform initiatives, such as those that seek to impose damage caps, face a number of hurdles, however. Caps on damages may be deemed unconstitutional since the Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a trial by jury in civil cases based on common law, which imposes no caps on civil trial damage awards by juries. Moreover, medical malpractice tort reform undoubtedly hurts patients and the public by failing to hold doctors, hospitals and other medical professionals financially responsible for their injuries or deaths that they have caused. As we recently reported, the vast majority of personal injury lawsuits are not frivolous. In fact, a study conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health analyzing more than 1,400 medical malpractice claims concluded that the majority of medical malpractice claims were meritorious and involved “injuries due to error,” with 80% involving death or serious injury.
Steinberg Goodman & Kalish (www.sgklawyers.com) is dedicated to protecting victims and their families. We handle medical malpractice, product liability, personal injury, wrongful death, auto accidents, professional negligence, birth trauma, and railroad law matters. Contact us at (800) 784-0150 or (312) 782-1386.
Medical malpractice reform, including proposed legislation that would cap the amount of damages that can be received in medical malpractice cases, has been causing much debate recently. Medical malpractice is a legal cause of action that can be brought when a healthcare provider fails to meet their obligation to provide adequate and appropriate medical treatment. When a healthcare provider fails to provide the appropriate treatment, and the patient suffers injury or death as a result, the healthcare provider may be held liable for medical costs, non-economic damages (pain and suffering, loss earning potential) and other expenses that the victim has incurred.
Several states, including North Carolina and Virginia, have voted on proposed medical malpractice legislation. Earlier this year, the North Carolina Senate approved a tort reform bill that would cap non-economic damages at $500,000 and require the plaintiff to prove gross negligence, rather than ordinary negligence, in order to sustain a medical malpractice claim against emergency room doctors.
Contrary to the North Carolina bill, Virginia’s medical malpractice legislation proposed to raise the cap on damages in medical malpractice cases from $2 million to $3 million and would increase the amount by $50,000 every year until 2031. Despite the fact that the bill was supported by both trial lawyers and doctors, and had been approved by the Virginia legislature, the governor vetoed the bill on March 31, 2011. Given the overwhelming support for the bill in Virginia’s legislature, however, it seems almost certain that Governor McDonnell’s veto will be overridden and the law will pass.
Many believe that the governor’s motivation for vetoing the bill, which was unanimously passed by the Virginia Senate and by a vote of 89-7 in the House, is largely due to future political aspirations. Critics suspect that Governor McDonnell has presidential or vice-presidential aspirations for 2012 and wants to be able to tout the fact that he vetoed medical malpractice legislation that would increase caps on damages and hurt doctors and hospitals.
In blocking the legislation, however, Governor McDonnell has only succeeded in hurting patients. Not only do caps on medical malpractice damages hurt victims of medical malpractice and their families, but caps on damages may also be unconstitutional. The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a trial by jury in civil cases based on common law, which imposes no caps on civil trial damage awards by juries. Nonetheless, regardless of whether medical malpractice damage caps are constitutional or not, they undoubtedly hurt patients and the general public by failing to hold doctors, hospitals and other medical professionals financially responsible for their injuries or deaths that they have caused.
Steinberg, Goodman, & Kalish (www.sgklawyers.com) is dedicated to protecting victims and their families. We handle medical malpractice, product liability, personal injury, wrongful death, auto accidents, professional negligence, birth trauma, and railroad law matters. Contact us at (800) 784-0150 or (312) 782-1386.
Recently there has been a renewed push for medical malpractice reform – both at the state and federal level – in an attempt to save the struggling health care system. However, medical malpractice reform measures alone will fail to help the healthcare system and will only hurt patients by facilitating a culture that lacks accountability.
Medical malpractice is a legal cause of action that can be brought when a healthcare provider fails to meet their obligation to provide adequate and appropriate medical treatment. When a healthcare provider fails to provide the appropriate treatment, and the patient suffers injury as a result, the healthcare provider may be held liable for medical costs, non-economic damages (pain and suffering, loss earning potential) and other expenses that the victim has incurred.
Most recently, the North Carolina Senate approved a tort reform bill that would cap non-economic damages at $500,000 and require gross negligence, rather than ordinary negligence, in order to sustain a medical malpractice claim against emergency room doctors.
The reforms could have devastating and unintended effects, however, and could potentially violate state law. For instance, some tort reform measures seek to eliminate the plaintiff’s right to a jury trial – a right that is guaranteed under most state constitutions. Limits on damages, such as North Carolina’s proposed cap on non-economic damages, fail to account for lost earning potential for measurable injuries like paralysis, brain damage or death.
Contrary to the tort reformers’ beliefs, the vast majority of medical malpractice lawsuits are not frivolous. In fact, a study conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health analyzing more than 1,400 medical malpractice claims concluded that the majority of medical malpractice claims were meritorious and involved “injuries due to error,” with 80% involving death or serious injury. Moreover, medical malpractice claims are not the cause of rising health care costs, nor are they the reason for doctors’ increased insurance rates increase.
Steinberg, Goodman, & Kalish (www.sgklawyers.com) is dedicated to protecting victims and their families. We handle medical malpractice, product liability, personal injury, wrongful death, auto accidents, professional negligence, birth trauma, and railroad law matters. Contact us at (888) 325-7299.
