Cornhuskers haven't gotten this high in any national rankings since the Osborne-Solich at high tide in 1999.
Point of Law.com blog for March 8, 2005 notes that "Delaware. . for the fourth year running was selected by senior corporate attorneys surveyed by Harris Interactive for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform as the state with the most favorable litigation climate." Right behind in the voting is Nebraska .
Indeed, look at almost all of the proposed tort reform measures in Congress and the Nebraska State Legislature instituted them long ago. Medical malpractice reform is hot now; a good summary of the Nebraska Hospital-Medical liability law passed in 1976 shows that Nebraska imposes a gross cap on a malpractice plaintiff's total injury, joint and several liability, limits on hospitals' and physicians' liability in exchange for acquiring coverage, a more restrictive definition of the duty of care, provisions for counting some collateral source payments, and the possibility of the prevailing party's winning attorney fees, among other provisions. Congress has proposed caps on non-economic damages, attorney fees, deductions for collateral source payments and structured settlements of some awards.
Med-mal plaintiffs in Nebraska might run into a jam, however. Where the Nebraska gross cap is $1,750,000 (RRS Neb. 44-2825(d)
a plaintiff who sustained $1,000,000 in economic damages with $750,000 of non-economic damages would get only $1,250,000 total damages because the Federal $250k cap kicked in. A resident of "tort-hell" southern Illinois could win unlimited economic damages from a sympathetic jury and lose only non-economic damages exceeding $250k.
Before med-mal reform goes ahead at the federal level, Congress should take into account those states that were ahead of the game, like Nebraska and Virginia, another state that imposes a gross damages cap on med-mal actions.
Friday, March 11, 2005
WE'RE NUMBER 2
Cornhuskers haven't gotten this high in any national rankings since the Osborne-Solich at high tide in 1999.
Point of Law.com blog for March 8, 2005 notes that "Delaware. . for the fourth year running was selected by senior corporate attorneys surveyed by Harris Interactive for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform as the state with the most favorable litigation climate." Right behind in the voting is Nebraska .
Indeed, look at almost all of the proposed tort reform measures in Congress and the Nebraska State Legislature instituted them long ago. Medical malpractice reform is hot now; a good summary of the Nebraska Hospital-Medical liability law passed in 1976 shows that Nebraska imposes a gross cap on a malpractice plaintiff's total injury, joint and several liability, limits on hospitals' and physicians' liability in exchange for acquiring coverage, a more restrictive definition of the duty of care, provisions for counting some collateral source payments, and the possibility of the prevailing party's winning attorney fees, among other provisions. Congress has proposed caps on non-economic damages, attorney fees, deductions for collateral source payments and structured settlements of some awards.
Med-mal plaintiffs in Nebraska might run into a jam, however. Where the Nebraska gross cap is $1,750,000 (RRS Neb. 44-2825(d)
a plaintiff who sustained $1,000,000 in economic damages with $750,000 of non-economic damages would get only $1,250,000 total damages because the Federal $250k cap kicked in. A resident of "tort-hell" southern Illinois could win unlimited economic damages from a sympathetic jury and lose only non-economic damages exceeding $250k.
Before med-mal reform goes ahead at the federal level, Congress should take into account those states that were ahead of the game, like Nebraska and Virginia, another state that imposes a gross damages cap on med-mal actions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment