Alliance Praises Tort Reform in Miss.

A tort reform measure that passed the Mississippi Legislature is a sound step forward toward more complete civil justice reform in the state, according to the Alliance of American Insurers.

“HB 19 is a tremendous step toward changing Mississippi’s reputation as a Mecca for plaintiffs’ lawyers,” said William Stander, government affairs representative for the Alliance’s Southeast Region, who was present when the legislative deadlock was broken late last night. “Combined with a medical malpractice reform bill that passed earlier in the special session, HB 19 makes a bold statement that Mississippi is on the road to reform.”

The bill resulted from a special session called by Gov. Ronnie Musgrove that began Sept. 5. Aimed primarily at protecting small business, the bill prevents venue shopping, revises joint and several liability and caps punitive damages. Unfortunately, the cap is linked to a defendant’s net worth, with an upper limit of $20 million.

“A better way to handle caps on punitives is to require that they bear a relationship to a plaintiff’s compensatory damages,” said Joyce Kraeger, an Alliance attorney. “That creates a more logical basis for assessing the damages. You’re not just pulling numbers out of a hat.”

Reform of the tort system at both the state and federal level has been a major goal of the Alliance for several years now, and the association plans a renewed major push for reform in targeted lines of business and states this coming year.

“For too long, our civil justice system has been undermined by entrepreneurial plaintiff attorneys who are harming consumers and the very notion of justice by abusing the legal system for personal gain,” Kraeger said. “The Alliance supports civil justice reform with the goal of ensuring fairness, balance and predictability in America’s legal system.”

The Alliance’s reform initiative is built on a four-legged platform that includes:
• Presumption of Validity-The model would provide an insurer or an other regulated entity with a rebuttable presumption that it was not liable because the alleged harmful practice had implicit or explicit approval from the proper regulatory authority at that time;
• Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies-would allow a court to abate or dismiss a class certification involving state agency jurisdiction in certain circumstances and would establish procedural rules;
• Staying Discovery-would provide for the suspension of discovery during a motion to dismiss class certification unless the court found the discovery necessary to prevent undue prejudice; and
• Appellate Bonds-would set up rules under which the court may limit the size, or waive the use, of appeal bonds in certain class actions. A defendant must post such a bond when appealing a court decision finding liability.

Topics Mississippi