- New movie “InJustice: A Film About Greed and Corruption in America’s Lawsuit Industry” premieres on Reelz Channel July 11 [film website; Bryan Quigley, U.S. Chamber]
- “Failure to Warn Suit Filed Against Tanning Salon” [AboutLawsuits via TortsProf; melanoma, Pennsylvania]
- NYC: “Politically Tied Lawyers Win Jobs Handling Foreclosures in the City” [NYT]
- Beldar tells a war story about the nature of de novo review, in the Prop 8 context;
- “Viacom’s Sumner Redstone: The Mogul Named ‘Sue!’” [Johnnie L. Roberts, The Wrap]
- Chairman of Dallas Fed salutes litigation reform’s role in Texas economic strength [CJAC; Rick Wartzman, L.A. Times]
- “Righthaven cheerleader wanted by irony police” [Kurt Opsahl, EFF, Citizen Media Law] “Righthaven pressing for right to seize defendants’ websites, computers” [Vegas Inc. via @PogoWasRight]
Posts tagged as:
tort reform
- New York State Sen. Jim Alesi drops much-criticized suit against constituent couple in whose house he was injured while trespassing [WHEC, Techdirt]
- “Distracted moving”: campaign heats up for laws prohibiting pedestrians from texting [Alkon, Greenfield, Popehat]
- “Good News: Tort Costs Eased in 2009. Bad News: They Still Totaled $248 Billion.” [CJAC, Insurance Journal, Towers Perrin report (PDF)]
- As Wisconsin moves to limit tort suits, lawyers race to file cases before deadline [Journal-Sentinel, NAM, NJLRA]
- Settling scientific and scholarly quarrels in France by way of defamation actions? Criminal libel complaints? [Ron Bailey] Update on Joseph Weiler criminal libel case [Heller, Opinio Juris, earlier here, etc.]
- NPR interview with Seth Mnookin on vaccine book [via TortsProf, earlier; plus, New York Observer]
- “HP Tries a Coupon Settlement” [PoL]
- “Strange but true” role of former Republican Senator Fred Thompson lobbying for Tennessee trial lawyers will not particularly surprise Overlawyered readers [WSJ Law Blog; background here, here, etc.]
{ 3 comments }
- “CBO Stands By Its Report: Tort Reform Would Save Billions” [ShopFloor; our weekend post on what actually wound up in Reid bill]
- “Indianapolis Tacks on Steep Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets” [Balko]
- “Fugitive Located Inside Homeland Security Dept. Office” [Lowering the Bar]
- Assumption of risk? New York courts field legal complaints over mosh dance injuries [Hochfelder]
- Company claiming patent on Ajax web technique is suing lots of defendants [W3C, ImVivo via @petewarden]
- Why Arizona voters still back Sheriff Joe [Conor Friedersdorf/Daily Dish, von Spakovsky/NRO (deploring "persecution" of Arpaio), Greenfield]
- “Are Breast Implants and Donated Organs Marital Assets?” [Carton, Legal Blog Watch]
- “Disbarment Looms for First Attorney Convicted Under N.J. Anti-Runner Law” [NJLJ]
{ 6 comments }
Commentary’s Jennifer Rubin notices:
A friend points out a little nugget of absurdity and political mendacity in the Pelosi health-care bill. Remember Obama’s effort to try a “test” for tort reform? (We don’t actually need a test, since it has worked to lower medical malpractice coverage and help increase access to doctors in states that have tried it.) Well, Pelosi’s bill has an anti-tort-reform measure. On pages 1431-1433 of the 1990-page spellbinder, there is a financial incentive for states to try “alternative medical liability laws.” But look — you don’t get the incentive if you have a law that would “limit attorneys’ fees or impose caps on damages.”
In other words, Congress is providing a financial incentive to uncap damages. Marvelous.
{ 12 comments }
I don’t agree with every one of the suggestions proposed by this Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform document authored by Victor Schwartz and Cary Silverman, but I agree with more than 90% of them, and it’s a good starting point for any discussion of tort reform.
{ 1 comment }
I summarize my recent testimony on the Hill in today’s American:
As I discussed in recent testimony on Capitol Hill, if one takes conservative estimates from these economic studies and adds it all up, the total cost to the economy from excessive litigation can be estimated to be between $600 billion and $900 billion a year, the vast majority of which is simply wealth destruction. That is between 4 and 6 percent of GNP, a tort tax of between $8,000 and $12,000 a year for an average family of four.
The entire hearing is on YouTube, or you can watch a highlight reel.
{ 1 comment }
In 2007, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously decided Borg-Warner v. Flores, holding that a defendant in an asbestos case was not liable unless its product was a “substantial factor” in causing injury.
But there are now bills in the Texas House and Senate, SB 1123 (recently reported out of Senate committee) and HB 1811, that seek to undo this by defining “substantial factor” to merely mean that a product “contributed to the [plaintiff’s] cumulative exposure”—whether or not other defendants’ products were far more responsible for a plaintiff’s injury. The effect of this rollback would be to return Texas to the role of asbestos magnet, since it could conceivably create indiscriminate liability for hundreds of innocent businesses in any given case. The effect will be very similar to the infamous Lipke rule in Madison County, Illinois that extracted billions of dollars from the innocent this decade.
Texans for Lawsuit Reform has a fact-sheet, as does the Texas Civil Justice League.
{ 2 comments }
Today I testified before the Senate Republican Conference about the effect on the economy of excessive litigation. A podcast is available on-line and, for the insomniacs among you, the hearing will be broadcast on C-SPAN tonight at 10:56 PM Eastern and again at 2:09 AM Eastern. Also testifying was Life Without Lawyers author Philip Howard; Crystal Chodes, who lost her job because of the expense of a meritless ADA filing mill suit; Texas doctor David Teuscher; and arbitration expert and University of Kansas law professor Christopher Drahozal.
If you just prefer reading what I have to say, my written testimony is on-line also:
The total loss to the economy from excessive tort litigation above and beyond a baseline of an employment at will regime and an average industrialized tort system can be estimated at between over $600 billion and over $900 billion a year, 4.3% to 6.5% of GNP, or a tort tax of between $8,000 and $12,000/year for an average family of four. And this is very much a conservative estimate, as other economists find much stronger effects than I have estimated here, as I have not tried to estimate a number of identifiable secondary and tertiary effects of excessive tort litigation on allocation of economic resources, and as I have not tried to estimate the likely effect of recent Congressional expansions of tort liability in the last twelve months.
I was pleased to hear from multiple Congressional staffers who are regular Overlawyered readers: one even surreptitiously added the website into my official biography. Carter Wood talks about the hearing and Senator Cornyn’s remarks over at Point of Law.
Update: video on-line at C-SPAN; my segment begins at 43:15 or so. And C-SPAN2 is rebroadcasting at 4:16 pm Eastern on Tuesday, March 17, which suggests that my appearance will be at about 5 pm Eastern.
{ 3 comments }
A USA Today story delves deeply into how Biden’s done the bidding of the litigation lobby special interest group, particularly with respect to the bipartisan asbestos litigation reform bill.
- As I type this post, I’m listening to Andrew Frey argue Conrad Black’s appeal before Judge Posner and the Seventh Circuit. Posner seems to be confused over whether incorrect jury instructions can be prejudicial in a general verdict. [Bashman roundup; earlier]
- “For years families bogged down in Harris County [Texas] probate courts have accused judges of bleeding estates of tens of thousands of dollars to pay high-priced lawyers for unnecessary work.” [Houston Chronicle; Alpert v. Riley (Tex. App. Jun. 5, 2008) (via)]
- Company sets policy. Employee violates policy. Is corporation criminally responsible for employee’s act? [POL; FCPA blog; Podgor]
- Merrill Lynch banker asks for investigation of Enron Task Force withholding of exculpatory evidence [Bloomberg]
- When calculating the costs of medical malpractice suits, let’s not forget the noneconomic costs. “In the [John] Ritter case, the jury agreed with the defendant physicians and exonerated them of any liability. They were lucky. How lucky? They were able to spend four years with attorneys worrying about their future, including the potential that they would be ordered to pay tens of millions of dollars and be left penniless. So, they didn’t really win. They just lost less.” [EM News via Kevin MD via Dr. RW]
- Nor should we forget the defensive medicine costs. [Kevin MD]
- Legal reform = job creation. [American Courthouse]
- According to Justinian Lane, if you’re reading this post, you’re a “spineless sycophant.” [Bizarro-Overlawyered]
{ 16 comments }
