Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Posts Tagged ‘Pennsylvania’

Pennsylvania obstetrics

Consider having your baby somewhere else: hit hard by the state’s malpractice crisis, the “five-county Philadelphia region [lost] 25 percent of its staffed OB beds between 1993 and 2003, according to Delaware Valley Healthcare Council President Andrew Wigglesworth. Within the past 18 to 24 months, he says, the region lost 10 hospital OB departments, including those at MCP, Methodist, Nazareth, Warminster, Mercy Fitzgerald, Episcopal and Elkins Park; while OB services were also lost from hospital closures including City Line, Sacred Heart in Norristown and Community Hospital in Chester.

“Liability issues have put extraordinary pressure on OB programs in southeastern Pa., while well over 50 percent of practicing obstetricians in the region, perhaps closer to 75 percent, have become employees whose liability coverage is paid for by hospitals, says Wigglesworth, who adds that the trend toward employed OB status in southeastern Pa. has accelerated over the past three and a half years. ‘It is clear that, without the intervention of hospitals to employ and cover obstetricians in the region, we would have an extraordinary crisis, in terms of availability of OB services,’ he says…

“Wigglesworth [notes] that liability costs alone have approached two-thirds of the reimbursement level. …’Surviving’ OB programs in the region are mostly represented by teaching hospitals, including Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (HUP), Pennsylvania Hospital, Einstein, Hahnemann, Jefferson and Temple.” (Christopher Guadagnino, “Obstetrician scarcity in Pennsylvania”, Physicians News Digest, May)(via Donna Rovito) (& letter to the editor Aug. 16).

Filed under: , , , , ,

Damage caps for me, but not for thee

Most of organized lawyerdom, as we know, strongly opposes any notion of capping damages recoverable by victims, even as applied to “non-economic” damages claimed for intangible harms such as pain and suffering or emotional distress. It turns out, however, that the bar enthusiastically supports the capping in nearly every state of one particular form of compensation, namely, the compensation of clients who are embezzled from or otherwise defrauded by their lawyers. In Pennsylvania, for example, the official Pennsylvania Lawyer Fund for Client Security (more) caps damages payable to defrauded clients at $75,000, although the loss actually sustained by the victimized client often runs far higher than that. Columnist Don Spatz of the Reading, Pa. Eagle notices the irony: “Even if you can prove your lawyer stole $200,000 from you, you’re out of luck. There’s a cap. … I haven’t heard lawyers worry about caps taking away those victims’ rights.” (“First, lawyer, heal thyself”, Reading Eagle, Mar. 24, at HALT site).

It should be noted that the damages clients attempt to recover after being defrauded by their lawyers are typically direct out-of-pocket economic losses, as opposed to money for humiliation, psychic distress and the like. Yet lawyers in most states have secured payout caps even lower than Pennsylvania’s $75,000, often much lower: Illinois lawyers cap their collective responsibility at a paltry $10,000 per case, for example, and Nevada’s at $15,000. (2002 ABA Center for Professional Responsibility survey of state plans, reprinted at Michigan Bar Association site, PDF, scroll to Chart II, part 2). Perhaps these lawyers are worried that setting caps at a more generous level (or, heaven forfend, removing them entirely) would increase the premiums currently assessed against them to cover the risk pools. In Pennsylvania, according to columnist Spatz, these premiums were recently running at the very extravagant level of $45 per lawyer per year.

In a number of states, it should be noted, lawyers impose an effective cap of zero on this particular kind of claim, by the simple method of not having established any collective client protection scheme at all. And there is a certain very plausible logic to that position: why after all should rank and file attorneys be asked to clean up the messes left by their errant brethren? Is a lawyer his brother’s keeper? It’s just that this argument would sit better were the leaders of the bar not constantly denouncing the medical profession for its alleged failure to police itself.

Read On…

Filed under: , , , , ,

“Gatekeeper awards” from Common Good

Common Good, the advocacy group chaired by author Philip K. Howard (The Death of Common Sense, The Collapse of the Common Good) and whose motto is “Reforming America’s Lawsuit Culture”, on Apr. 8 announced its first “Gatekeeper Awards” honoring judges who throw out lawsuits that would better never have been filed. Among the cases praised: a Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinion excluding scientific testimony to the effect that Doritos, the snack food, is intrinsically unsafe in texture; a Virginia high court ruling upholding assumption of risk in the case of a baseball spectator hit by a ball; a Third Circuit decision holding that a “public school third-grader cannot sue for being prevented from soliciting classmates’ signatures for a petition opposing a voluntary class trip to the circus”; an Eighth Circuit opinion excluding punitive damages in the case of a patently accidental air crash; and the Nevada Supreme Court’s ruling (see Nov. 7) that a passenger cannot sue a homeowner over injuries sustained when a car crashed into a flowerbed.

Filed under: , , , , ,

“Trial lawyers court GOP”

Charm offensive? “Last week, ATLA dispatched a team of Republican trial lawyers to meet with key GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill. … behind the scenes, ATLA has been surprisingly generous toward GOP organizations,” giving $30,000 apiece this cycle to the National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee, the maximum allowable. (Geoff Earle, The Hill, May 5)(see Aug. 25). In Florida, housing secretary Mel Martinez’s background as a former president of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers continues to generate controversy in the Republican Senate primary race, which comes to a vote Aug. 31; but Martinez says he supports class-action reform and even some version of loser-pays (William March, “Stance On Tort Awkward For GOP”, Tampa Tribune, May 2; see Feb. 21). [Update Sept. 3: Martinez wins primary]. And in Pennsylvania, the plaintiff’s bar is both perplexed and delighted that two of its good friends — incumbent Republican Arlen (“Shanin’s dad“) Specter and Democratic challenger Joe Hoeffel — are running against each other for Senate. “It’s going to be a tough call,” said James Mundy, a former president of the trial lawyers’ association in the Keystone State. “But in a sense it’s a nice call, because we can’t lose.” (Melissa Nann, “Arlen Specter or His Opponent? Trial Lawyers Like Both”, Legal Intelligencer, May 4). See also Lori Patel, “Lawyer Loyalties Eclipse Family Ties”, Law.com, Feb. 5 (Kline & Specter members donated more to Sen. Edwards than to Sen. Specter).

Filed under: , ,

Update: PPA litigation

In 2000, after a study raised concerns of a possible connection with hemorrhagic stroke, the Food and Drug Administration banned the use of phenylopropanolamine (PPA), a stimulant long widely used in over-the-counter decongestants like Alka-Seltzer Plus and Contac, as well as in appetite suppressants. Lawyers rushed to file suits blaming drugmakers for strokes and other ills suffered by persons who had used the once near-ubiquitous compound (see Apr. 6-8, 2001; Oct. 28, 2003). Earlier this spring the Los Angeles Times ran a long piece summarizing (and uncritically endorsing) the plaintiffs’ case (Kevin Sack and Alicia Mundy, “A Dose of Denial”, Mar. 28). However, juries thus far have found that case considerably less persuasive: last month a Philadelphia jury returned a defense verdict in a case against Glaxo SmithKline over its Contac 12 hour medication (representing the plaintiff: the senatorially well-connected Kline and Specter). In three trials so far, that leaves the score at 0-3 in favor of the defense. (Melissa Nann, “Defense Wins Pennsylvania’s First PPA Verdict”, The Legal Intelligencer, Apr. 6). Update Jan. 21, 2006: further setbacks to litigation.

Filed under: ,

M.D.s in the dock

The AMA’s American Medical News takes the reader inside a Chicago malpractice trial in which Dr. Rose Diakos was sued for performing a tubal ligation which failed to prevent a patient’s pregnancy. The case resulted in a defense verdict, in part because the plaintiff’s expert witness came across quite badly, and the doctor learned at least one lesson: document her patient interviews with lots and lots of notes in future to protect herself (Tanya Albert, “One physician’s malpractice battle: Dr. Diakos on trial”, Mar. 22-29). Chris Rangel of RangelMD has some further thoughts on expert witnesses (Mar. 14). Psychologist Dan Shapiro, who specializes in counseling doctors, has written a book (“Delivering Doctor Amelia“) recounting his attempts to help a talented young ob/gyn who suspends her practice amid feelings of worthlessness and failure; the trigger for her doing so is the birth of a baby with cerebral palsy to one of her patients, with attending lawsuit (description in NYU Literature, the Arts and Medicine Database) (via MedPundit). And the Pennsylvania Medical Society has published comments by eight doctors-to-be explaining why they do not intend to set up practice in the litigation-wracked Keystone State (“The Medical Resident Diaries — Why They?re Leaving“).

Filed under: ,

On Pa. court sleaze, a kind of hush

Profile of a maverick attorney who after decades of fighting machine corruption and courthouse politics in Pennsylvania is now working for malpractice reform in the state: “[Bob] Surrick is upset about the silencing of the print media because of the fear of libel suits. He said that during the 18 years that Gene Roberts was the Philadelphia Inquirer’s executive editor, the newspaper won 17 Pulitzers, which was unheard of for a newspaper. But during the 1980s (while Roberts was still editor) Surrick said that the judges and justices started the business of suing their critics, particularly the print media critics, for libel, effectively silencing the Inquirer; after Roberts left, the newspaper no longer did investigative reporting on the judiciary. ‘If the media — the guardian of the truth about what is going on in government — does not tell you, who is going to tell you?’ Surrick asks.” (Eileen Laskas, “Whatever Happened to Bob Surrick?”, CountyPressOnline (Phila. suburbs), Jan. 28) (via Donna Rovito’s Liability Update Information Network). For more on the kinds of legal trouble you can get into by criticizing Pennsylvania judges, see Oct. 24-25, 2001.

Filed under: , , , , , , ,

Grocery worker wins ADA case

37-year-old grocery worker David Warnes took a donut from an Entenmann’s box, ate half of it, and returned the other half to the box on the shelf. The Giant Eagle supermarket fired him — and bought itself a lawsuit. Mr. Warnes has Down Syndrome and, his mother explains, “impulsively” ate the doughnut without understanding the consequences of his actions. Somehow, this case got to a jury, which ruled in Mr. Warnes’s favor; the supermarket reached a settlement rather than risk punitive damages. “The lawsuit sought damages for lost wages, reimbursement for the difficulty Warnes would have in finding another job, emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation.” “Warnes’ attorney, Timothy O’Brien, said his client was ‘very happy’ with the jury’s decision.” “‘He was pleased,’ said his mother, Carol. ‘[But] he doesn’t really comprehend the legal system.'” That makes two of us, at least in this case. (Torsten Ove, “Giant Eagle reaches settlement with former employee”, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Mar. 6; Robert Baird, “Grocery worker wins lawsuit”, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Mar. 5).

Read On…

Filed under: , , ,

States stomp on substitute smokes, cont’d

As we noted Jan. 13 and Jan. 23, the structure of the great 1998 tobacco robbery puts state governments under financial pressure to restrict or suppress the activities of maverick cigarette makers that do not participate in the settlement fund. Vice Squad, which has been following this issue, has recent posts detailing how this is happening in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida (Feb. 23) and Pennsylvania again (Feb. 26)(Florida is one of four states with their own settlements with the tobacco majors paralleling the 46-state main settlement).

Filed under: , ,

Tribe: that Crayola factory is ours

The latest land claim assertion, by the Delaware Nation, is openly meant to be traded off for casino rights. The law firm of Cozen & O’Connor is representing the tribe in the action, which targets not only crayon-maker Binney & Smith but 19 hapless homeowners as well as a couple of small businesses and several layers of Pennsylvania government. We wrote about Indian land claim litigation a year and a half ago. (Shannon P. Duffy, “Indian Tribe Sues Over Pennsylvania Land”, The Legal Intelligencer, Jan. 20). Update: court dismissed case in late 2004 (PDF).

Filed under: , ,