Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_06-cv-00658/USCOURTS-ared-4_06-cv-00658-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

ELIZABETH MARCOTTE PLAINTIFF

VS. NO. 4:06CV000658

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. and

JOHN DOE MAINTENANCE COMPANY DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Pending is Plaintiff’s motion in limine to allow the introduction of the value of medical

services provided to Plaintiff. (Docket # 47). Defendant has responded. 

Plaintiff argues that the Civil Justice Reform Act of 2003 is unconstitutional in that it

violates Article V, section 32 of the Arkansas Constitution and Amendment 80 to the Arkansas

Constitution because the statute infringes on the Plaintiff’s right to complete compensation for

personal injury and infringes on the powers of the Arkansas Supreme Court to set rules of civil

procedure. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Ark. Code Ann. §16-55-212 changed the collateralsource rule. 

The Court has located one case in which the Arkansas Supreme Court has been presented

with this argument, however, the Court found the issue moot and declined to issue an advisory

opinion. Shipp v. Franklin, 2007 WL 1713271 (Ark. 2007). In Shipp, the Court set forth the

standard for reviewing the constitutionality of a statute: 

It is well-settled that there is a presumption of validity attending every

consideration of a statute's constitutionality; every act carries a strong presumption

of constitutionality, and before an act will be held unconstitutional, the

incompatibility between it and the constitution must be clear. Summerville v.

Thrower, --- Ark. ----, --- S.W.3d ---- (Mar. 15, 2007). Any doubt as to the

constitutionality of a statute must be resolved in favor of its constitutionality. Id.

The heavy burden of demonstrating the unconstitutionality is upon the one attacking

Case 4:06-cv-00658-JMM Document 61 Filed 07/20/07 Page 1 of 2
it. Id. If possible, we will construe a statute so that it is constitutional. Summerville

v. Thrower, supra. 

Shipp v. Franklin, (Ark.,2007)

In light of this heavy burden and the strong presumption of statute’s constitutionality the

Court declines to find the statute unconstitutional.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of July, 2007.

____________________________________

James M. Moody

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-00658-JMM Document 61 Filed 07/20/07 Page 2 of 2