Tort Reform Legislation Research Articles

Tort reform: The medicolegal environment surrounding spinal surgery

Spinal surgery is recognized as one of the most legally challenging specialties in the medical profession, with a history of complex and enduring issues related to medical malpractice. Spinal surgeons must be knowledgeable about common causes of medical malpractice in spinal surgery, such as intraoperative adverse events, wrong-level surgery, and neurologic surgery. Surgeons must stay informed about tort reform legislation in their respective states and their potential implications for their practices.

Resolving Malpractice Claims after Tort Reform: Experience in a Self-Insured Texas Public Academic Health System.

To describe the litigation experience in a state with strict tort reform of a large public university health system that has committed to transparency with patients and families in resolving medical errors. Secondary data collected from The University of Texas System, which self-insures approximately 6,000 physicians at six health campuses across the state. We obtained internal case management data for all medical malpractice claims closed during 1year before and 6 recent years following the enactment of state tort reform legislation. We retrospectively reviewed information about malpractice claimants, malpractice claims, and the process and outcome of dispute resolution. We accessed an internal case management database, supplemented by both electronic and paper records compiled by the university's Office of General Counsel. Closed claims dropped from 244 in 2001-2002 to an annual mean of 96 in 2009-2015, closures following lawsuits from 136 in 2001-2002 to an annual mean of 28 in 2009-2015, and paid claims from 60 in 2001 to an annual mean of 20 in 2009-2015. Patterns of resolution suggest efforts by the university to provide some compensation to injured patients in cases that were no longer economically viable for plaintiffs' lawyers to litigate. The percentage of payments relating to cases in which lawsuits had been filed decreased from 82 percent in 2001-2002 to 47 percent in 2009-2012 and again to 29 percent in 2012-2015, although most paid claimants were represented by attorneys. Unrepresented patients received payment in 13 cases closed in 2009-2012 (22 percent of payments; mean amount $60,566) and in 24 cases closed in 2012-2015 (41 percent of payments; mean amount $109,410). Even after tort reform, however, claims that resulted in payment remained slow to resolve, which was worsened for claimants subject to Medicare secondary payer rules. Strict confidentiality became a more common condition of settlement, although restrictions were subsequently relaxed in order to further transparency and improve patient safety. Malpractice litigation risk diminished substantially for a public university health system in Texas following legal changes that reduced rights to sue and available damages. Health systems operating in a low-tort environment should work with policy makers, plaintiffs' attorneys, and patient groups to assist unrepresented patients, facilitate early mediation, limit nondisclosure obligations following settlement, and expedite the resolution of Medicare liens.

Tort Reform, SAS58, And Auditor Liability: Is There An Interaction?

One of the major concerns of the auditing profession is its increasing exposure to litigation, particularly with parties not historically considered to have privity under contract law. A major reason for the increase in lawsuits against accounting firms is that they are often the only survivors in a multiparty action when a company fails. In an attempt to reduce the disparity between the perceptions of the profession and the public as to the responsibilities of an independent auditor, the AICPA issued SAS58, one of the Expectation Gap auditing standards. SAS58 changed the wording of the standard unqualified auditors report, but did not alter the underlying audit process or the auditors responsibility for the audited financial statements. Previous research suggests that jurors assessments of liability in audit failure suits have not been affected by SAS58. However, this research was based on a join and several liability model, and did not address the possibility that SAS58, in conjunction with tort reform legislation, may modify jurors perceptions of auditor liability. The present study was designed to explore that interaction.

Medical Liability Reform

Mississippi enacted medical negligence and other tort reform legislation that generally became effective for causes of action filed on or after January 1, 2003, and September 1, 2004. Data regarding lawsuits against physicians insured by the Medical Assurance Company of Mississippi (MACM), the largest medical liability insurer in the state, and MACM-insured Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) in particular, were compared by year from 1986 to 2010. The data encompassed the periods before and after the implementation of Mississippi's tort reform legislation. In addition, MACM medical liability premiums were compared by year from 2000 to 2010. Mississippi's tort reform laws were associated with a steep drop in lawsuits against MACM-insured physicians, particularly MACM-insured ob-gyns, as well as medical liability premium reductions and refunds.

Future Economic Damages

Future Economic Damages

Research on Human Embryonic Stem Cells Now Eligible for NIH Funding; Tort Reform Legislation Proposed in Georgia; Free Access Policy Made Permanent; Worries About Synthetic Bioweapons; Two Animal Rights Extremists Indicted; Two Genetic Tests Not Endorsed by CDC Group; What Regulation Is Needed for Genetic Testing?; Possible Criminalization of Stem Cell Research

Research on Human Embryonic Stem Cells Now Eligible for NIH Funding; Tort Reform Legislation Proposed in Georgia; Free Access Policy Made Permanent; Worries About Synthetic Bioweapons; Two Animal Rights Extremists Indicted; Two Genetic Tests Not Endorsed by CDC Group; What Regulation Is Needed for Genetic Testing?; Possible Criminalization of Stem Cell Research

State Legislative Solutions to Silica/Mixed-Dust Claims

Ohio has enacted comprehensive silica and mixed-dust legislation in an effort to prevent these claims from becoming the latest mass tort. The legislation attempts to eliminate the use of experts who spend the majority of their professional time providing medical and exposure consulting services to the plaintiffs' bar. By avoiding the worst abuses of the asbestos tort system and requiring individuals to establish certain minimum medical criteria before pursuing a personal injury claim, the Ohio legislation serves as a model for comprehensive state and federal tort reform legislation.

Auditor decision-making in different litigation environments: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, audit reports and audit firm size

The adoption of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 had a marked impact on public accounting firms in the US by significantly reducing their liability exposure with respect to litigation involving publicly traded audit clients. This shift in the litigation environment of public accounting firms has been argued to have been manifest in changed auditor decisions regarding their audit clients. While this tort reform legislation was intended to benefit all audit firms, recent research suggests that it may have differentially affected auditors based on audit firm size. In this study, we examine the impact of the change in litigation environment ushered in by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and Big 6 membership on going-concern modification decisions for companies entering bankruptcy before and after the new legislation. Our findings, based on analyses of 694 financially stressed firms that entered into bankruptcy during the period 1991 to 2001, indicate that the likelihood of a going-concern modified opinion decreased significantly after the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, and the change was particularly pronounced for the Big 6 audit firms. These results suggest that this important litigation reform had a significant effect on auditor decision-making, and that it had more of an effect on audit decisions of the Big 6 firms in comparison to the non-Big 6 firms.

Update on Vaccine Liability in the United States: Presentation at the National Vaccine Program Office Workshop on Strengthening the Supply of Routinely Recommended Vaccines in the United States, 12 February 2002

Two decades ago, a liability crisis brought on by concerns about the safety of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine led to supply shortages and calls for rationing of the vaccine. Vaccine prices skyrocketed, and research on new products was threatened. In response, Congress created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which is tort reform legislation designed to compensate individuals quickly, easily, and generously. Since 1988, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has stabilized the marketplace, as evidenced by high immunization rates, stable pricing, and an increasing number of vaccine candidates in development. Although current vaccine shortages do not appear to be related to issues of liability, a new wave of tort litigation alleging that some vaccines cause autism has led to speculation that history could repeat itself.

The impact of large jury verdicts and tort reform

The “cost” of medical malpractice litigation is a topic that is often debated. From skyrocketing malpractice insurance premiums to ever increasing jury verdicts, who or what to blame often makes for lively discussion between the plaintiff and defense bars. The movement toward tort reform legislation at the state level is and has been touted as a possible solution that both sides can support. The question is whether tort reform measures actually work or are simply dressing the same problem in different clothes.

State Constitutions and American Tort Law: A History

Over the past twenty years, a number of state statutes purporting to reform the law of torts have been struck down by state courts as unconstitutional under state constitutions. Commentators on all sides have treated these decisions as a new phenomenon in American law. In fact, American tort law has developed for over a century in the shadow of state (and occasionally federal) constitutional law. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, state tort reform legislation came under sustained constitutional critique. Late nineteenth and early twentieth-century state courts developed a small number of time-tested outer bounds on the legislative power to alter the rules of tort suits. The current generation of state constitutional decisions reviewing tort reform legislation are thus merely the latest incarnation of what has been more than a hundred years of interaction between American constitutions at the state and sometimes even federal levels, on one hand, and the law of torts, on the other. This history, in turn, is a cautionary tale for all those who would intervene in today's tort reform efforts. Supporters of modern tort reform have little occasion for seeing unprecedented threats to basic constitutional principles. But those who would use state constitutional litigation to ward off legislated tort reform should be wary, too, for under the guise of judicial review, state courts have all too often used state constitutional provisions to obstruct experiments in public policy that over time have come to be widely respected.

Unintended Consequences of Tort Reform: Rent Seeking in New York State's Structured Settlements Statutes

Abstract No abstract available.

Tort Reform Voting in the U.S. Senate

This article analyzes the determinants of Senate voting on tort reform. The key issue addressed is the effect of party affiliation, experience as an attorney, constituent economic interests, and contributions to Senate candidates from the American Trial Lawyers' Political Action Committee (ATLPAC) on subsequent voting on tort reform legislation in the Senate. The article employs logit regression to model the determinants of voting on tort reform in the Senate. The results suggest that party interests, constituent interests, and self-interest influenced voting on tort reform. Democratic senators and those who are attorneys were less likely to vote in favor of tort reform. Contributions from ATLPAC significantly decreased the likelihood of a senator voting for tort reform. The size of the legal profession within the senator's state and the number of new corporations in the state have a small but significant impact.

The effect of 1980s tort reform legislation on general liability and medical malpractice insurance.

A large number of states adopted tort reforms in the mid-1980s to limit the dramatic surge in insurance losses and premiums. Evidence based on liability insurance data by state indicates that these reforms substantially influenced general liability insurance. The levels of losses, premiums, and loss ratios (a measure of insurance profitability) all reflected the impact of the reforms. The large-scale reform efforts in 1986 were particularly influential. Medical malpractice insurance was much less sensitive to the reform efforts.

The effect of 1980s tort reform legislation on general liability and medical malpractice insurance

The effect of 1980s tort reform legislation on general liability and medical malpractice insurance

Quality control in health care: developments in the law of medical malpractice.

Physicians and institutional providers face expanding liability exposure today, in spite of state tort reform legislation and public awareness of the costs of malpractice for providers. Standards of practice are evolving rapidly; new medical technologies are being introduced at a rapid rate; information is proliferating as to treatment efficacy, patient risk, and diseases generally. Tort standards mirror this change. As medical standards of care evolve, they provide a benchmark against which to measure provider failure. The liability exposure of physicians is affected by (1) the generation of data, including outcomes data usable to profile physician practice, and statistical data that allows for predictions as to treatment efficacy, and patient prognosis; (2) obligations to inform patients and third parties of risk created by contagious disease and other sources of harm; (3) obligations of physicians to disclose risks that the provider creates for the patient; (4) obligations to disclose conflicts of interest arising out of the practice setting; and (5) duties arising from new epidemiological knowledge.

<Paper>Current Movement Toward Tort Reform Legislation and Important Cases of Product Liability in the United States

<Paper>Current Movement Toward Tort Reform Legislation and Important Cases of Product Liability in the United States

The Performance of Liability Insurance in States with Different Products-Liability Statutes

Previous articleNext article No AccessThe Performance of Liability Insurance in States with Different Products-Liability StatutesW. Kip ViscusiW. Kip Viscusi Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Legal Studies Volume 19, Number S2Jun., 1990The Law and Economics of Risk Sponsored by The University of Chicago Law School Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/467874 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 16Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1990 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Charles L. Baum The effects of medical malpractice tort reform on physician supply an analysis of legislative changes from 2009 to 2016, Southern Economic Journal 87, no.22 (Oct 2020): 540–575.https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12465Patricia H. Born, J. Bradley Karl, Hugo Montesinos-Yufa T HE E FFECTOF D AMAGE C AP R EFORMSON M EDICAL M ALPRACTICE I NSURANCE M ARKET C ONDITIONS D URING P ERIODSOF C RISES, Journal of Risk and Insurance 54 (Aug 2018).https://doi.org/10.1111/jori.12261Patricia H. Born, J. Bradley Karl The Effect of Tort Reform on Medical Malpractice Insurance Market Trends, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 13, no.44 (Nov 2016): 718–755.https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12131M. F. Grace, J. T. Leverty How Tort Reform Affects Insurance Markets, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 29, no.66 (Jul 2012): 1253–1278.https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ews026Daniel P. Kessler, Daniel L. Rubinfeld Chapter 5 Empirical Study of the Civil Justice System, (Jan 2007): 343–402.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0730(07)01005-5Timo H Kaisanlahti Extended Liability of Shareholders?, Journal of Corporate Law Studies 6, no.11 (Apr 2015): 139–163.https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2006.11419949 Mark J. Browne , Ellen S. Pryor , and Bob Puelz The Effect of Bad‐Faith Laws on First‐Party Insurance Claims Decisions Browne/Pryor/Puelz, The Journal of Legal Studies 33, no.22 (Jul 2015): 355–390.https://doi.org/10.1086/423189W. Kip Viscusi, Patricia Born THE PERFORMANCE OF THE 1980S CALIFORNIA INSURANCE AND LIABILITY REFORMS, Risk Management & Insurance Review 2, no.22 (Jan 1999): 14–33.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6296.1999.tb00049.xRobert Puelz, Mark J. Browne The Effect of Legal Rules on the Value of Economic and Non-Economic Damages and the Decision to File, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 1998).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.120608Joan T. Schmit, Mark J. Browne, Han Duck Lee THE EFFECT OF STATE TORT REFORMS ON CLAIM FILINGS, Risk Management and Insurance Review 1, no.11 (Apr 2009): 1–17.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6296.1997.tb00060.xW. Kip Viscusi, Patricia Born The General-Liability Reform Experiments and the Distribution of Insurance-Market Outcomes, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 13, no.22 (Apr 1995): 183–188.https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1995.10524592W. Kip Viscusi The risky business of insurance pricing, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7, no.11 (Aug 1993): 117–139.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065318W. Kip Viscusi, Richard J. Zeckhauser, Patricia Born, Glenn Blackmon The effect of 1980s tort reform legislation on general liability and medical malpractice insurance, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 6, no.22 (Apr 1993): 165–186.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065357 W. Kip Viscusi , and Michael J. Moore Product Liability, Research and Development, and Innovation, Journal of Political Economy 101, no.11 (Oct 2015): 161–184.https://doi.org/10.1086/261870W. Kip Viscusi The Risky Business of Insurance Pricing, (Jan 1993): 117–139.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2192-7_8W. Kip Viscusi Product and Occupational Liability, Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, no.33 (Aug 1991): 71–91.https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.3.71

One state's tort reform legislation—a commentary

One state's tort reform legislation—a commentary