 |
Liabilty Law Debuts in Washington |
Breaking news at press time: on September 26, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 4600, the ISMS- and AMA-backed tort reform bill that calls for caps on “pain and suffering”
jury verdict awards in medical malpractice cases.
Now there’s a new challenge: H.R. 4600 faces an uphill battle in the Democratically-controlled
Senate. But with doctors being forced into retirement, curtailing their practices, or relocating to “friendlier” states, the quality health care that all Americans take for granted could soon be put in jeopardy.
If you haven’t done so already, call or write U.S. Senators Durbin and Fitzgerald and urge them to vote “yes” on H.R. 4600. Your patients – and your profession – are counting on you!
Here’s H.R. 4600 in a nutshell:
- Plaintiffs would have a limited number of years to file a health care liability action, to ensure that evidence is not destroyed and memories are fresh. The Act would extend the statute of limitations for minors injured before age six.
- Defendants would only be liable in proportion to their degree of fault. Damage awards would take into consideration other payments already made to the injured party.
- The Act would not limit the amount a patient can receive for quantifiable injuries (economic damages) resulting from a provider's care, unless restricted by state law. Only non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, would face a cap of $250,000.
- The Act would put reasonable limits on punitive damages. Punitive damages would be allowed to be the greater of two times the amount of economic damages awarded or $250,000. Illinois' 1985 reforms eliminated all punitive damages for medical liability
litigation; under H.R. 4600 this state law would be preserved.
- Past and current expenses would be paid at the time of judgment or settlement, and money for future expenses would be paid over time, rather than in one lump sum. Also, courts would be able to limit attorney contingency fees, benefitting the injured patient.
- State laws regarding medical liability reform would be respected, because the Act would establish a ceiling on non-economic damages and provide guidelines for punitive damage awards only in states where the state legislature has failed to act.