Source: http://www.atra.org/issue/medical-liability-reform/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 00:23:41+00:00

Document:
In state civil justice systems that lack reasonable limits on liability, multi-million dollar jury awards and settlements in medical liability cases have forced many insurance companies to either leave the market or substantially raise costs. Increasingly, physicians in these states are choosing to stop practicing medicine, abandon high-risk parts of their practices, or move their practices to other states.
To help bring a degree of predictability and fairness to the civil justice system that is critical to solving the growing medical access and affordability crisis, ATRA recommends a medical liability reform packages that includes: (1) a $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages; (2) a sliding scale for attorney’s contingent fees; (3) periodic payment of future damages; and (4) abolition of the collateral source.
The personal injury bar likes to argue that only insurance companies are to blame for the current medical liability crisis. Pointing to significant declines in the stock market, they blame insurance companies for raising rates to make up for allegedly irresponsible investing practices. But market fluctuations cannot fully explain the sharp increases in medical liability insurance pricing, especially since insurance companies invest only 13% of their total investments in stocks. A better explanation of why insurance companies have raised rates is that they have had to cover the cost of increased claim payments, which have risen almost three times the rate of inflation in recent years.
indemnified for the first $25,000.
A comprehensive health care access act which contains a provision for an absolute defense against medical liability when doctors adhere to practice parameters. Non-compliance to practice parameters may not be used as a basis for a cause of action.
Limits health care providers’ liability for harm caused by certain medical devices.
Requires a certificate of merit prior to filing claims against licensed professionals.
Clarified that: (1) a treating physician can be called to testify regarding facts, diagnosis and treatment plan of his patient, and (2) a lawyer and practitioner of the healing arts may contact each other for a limited number of purposes. Some judges had previously barred physicians from providing such testimony.
Added “health care facility” to the definition of “health care provider” in the Health Care Malpractice Act. The law assured that the state’s medical liability reforms apply to nursing care facilities and residential assisted living facilities.
Provided immunity from liability for volunteer health care professionals at nonprofit health care facilities.
Limited the number of expert witnesses that can be called to testify in medical liability cases.
Prohibited medical malpractice lawsuits against medical professional corporations including professional service corporations, limited liability companies, and registered limited liability partnerships.
Required a certificate of merit to be filed in medical malpractice cases in which expert testimony is required.
Provided that no health care provider is liable to a patient or third party for injuries sustained as a result of the ingestion of a prescription drug or use of a medical device that was prescribed or used by a healthcare provider in accordance with instructions approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regarding dosage and administration of the drug, the indications for which the drug should be taken or device should be used, and the contraindications against the drug or using the device. The liability exemption does not apply if: (1) the health care provider had actual knowledge that the drug or device was inherently unsafe for the purpose for which it was prescribed or used or (2) a manufacturer of such drug or device publicly announces changes in the dosage or administration of such drug or changes in contraindications against taking the drug or using the device and the health care provider fails to follow such publicly announced changes and such failure proximately caused or contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries or damages.
Provided that no statement, affirmation, gesture or conduct of a healthcare provider who provided healthcare services to a patient, expressing apology, sympathy, commiseration, condolence, compassion or a general sense of benevolence, to the patient, a relative of the patient or a representative of the patient and which relate to the discomfort, pain, suffering, injury or death of the patient shall be admissible as evidence of an admission of liability or as evidence of an admission against interest in medical liability civil actions.
In an action against a professional (such as physicians, medical professionals, architects, CPAs, etc.), increased the standard for admitting expert witness testimony by defining an expert witness as one who: (1) is qualified as to the acceptable standard of conduct of the professional whose conduct is at issue; (2) is licensed by an appropriate regulatory agency; (3) is board certified; and (4) has actual professional knowledge based on active practice for at least three to five years, has taught for at least half of his professional time for at least three to five years, or any combination thereof for at least three to five years. In such actions against a professional, the plaintiff must file an affidavit of an expert witness which specifies at least one negligent act or omission and the factual bases for each claim, unless the basis of the claim does not require specialized knowledge or experience to evaluate the conduct of the defendant. Provided that in any other civil action, expert witness is defined as one who has scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge which may assist the trier of fact in understanding evidence and determining a fact or issue in the case.
Specified that actions against physicians and other health care providers for malpractice must be brought within two years of a minor’s eighteenth birthday.
Prohibited statements, writings, or benevolent gestures expressing sympathy by medical providers from being admitted into evidence.
Limited noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $750,000.
Allowed parties in an action to elect to submit the dispute to arbitration.
Reenacted the eight-year statute of repose for medical liability cases.
Allowed charitable health care providers rendering professional services gratuitously to be exempt from legal liability.
Provided that a statement, affirmation, gesture, or conduct of a health care provider or their employee or agent that expresses apology, sympathy, commiseration, condolence, compassion, or benevolence to a patient is not admissible as evidence of liability.
Provides businesses and non-profits some liability protection when performing acts in a time of emergency or crisis in coordination with a state agency.
Creates a clear reasonable standard for physicians when providing patients with information about the risks and benefits of reasonable alternate treatment. Directly addresses a Wisconsin Supreme Court (Jandre v. Wisconsin Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund) by making it clear that a negligent diagnosis claim is separate from an informed consent claim.
Clarifies that in medical peer review proceedings, peer review information shall be private, confidential, privileged and not subject to discovery. Also states that in any action brought against a health care facility involving possible negligence in hiring, or contract with, a health care professional, any information discovered pursuant to a claim of negligence against such health care facility shall not be admissible as evidence until a judge or jury has first found the health care professional to have been negligent in providing health care services to the patient I n such health acre facility.
Sets forth than in any civil action for professional negligence, the plaintiff shall attach to the petition an affidavit and sets forth what is required in the filing and what should be done without an affidavit attached.
Wall v. Marouk, 302 P.3d 775 (Okla. 2013).
Provides that a statement or conduct of a health care provider that expresses apology to a patient or patient’s relative or representative is not admissible as evidence of liability or as an admission against interest.
Provides that a health care provider’s failure to comply with or a health care provider’s breach of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act shall not be admissible, used to determine the standard of care, or the legal basis for a presumption of negligence in any medical liability action.
Prohibits New Mexico courts from accepting lawsuits for care rendered out-of-state, if the patient has consented to choice of law and jurisdiction. The legislation applies to out-of-state physicians, physician groups, health care providers, hospitals, outpatient facilities and their employees.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 2122 (2003): W.V. Code Ann. § 55-7B-8.
Limits the award of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000 to $500,000 depending on the severity of the injuries.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: AB 36 (1995): Wisc. Stat. Ann. §§ 893.55, 895.04.
Limits the award of noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $350,000, indexed for inflation. The $350,000 limit on noneconomic damages awards in medical liability cases did not violate the right to jury trial, separation of powers, remedy for wrongs, equal protection, or due process provisions of the State constitution. Guzman v. St. Francis Hospital, Inc., 2000 WL 1848463 (Wis. App. Dec. 19, 2000).
Requires the plaintiff, in medical liability cases, to provide certification of expert witnesses. The plaintiff must disclose the identity and qualifications of the expert witness who certified that the defendant deviated from the applicable standard of care and the deviation was the proximate cause of the injuries claimed. The certification is required before the plaintiff can commence any action for medical liability.
States that in an action for medical liability, the court, upon showing good cause, may conduct an in camera review of the opinion obtained by the plaintiff of an expert witness who certified that the defendant deviated from the applicable standard of care and the deviation was the proximate cause of the injuries claimed.
Provides that a party in a medical liability action or arbitration may not attempt to allocate fault to any health care provider unless a certificate of compliance has been issued. Also, requires that evidence from a medical review panel remain unreportable to a health care facility or health insurance plan.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 4 (2003).
Limits the award of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000 against all doctors and health care practitioners and a $250,000 per-facility cap against health care facilities such as hospitals and nursing homes, with an overall cap of $500,000 against health care facilities, creating in effect an overall limit of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases of $750,000.
Adopts the federal rules of evidence. Sets out that a qualified expert witness may testify on scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge if; (1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. Also sets out that facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible shall no tbe disclosed to the jury by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the court determines that their probative value in assisting the jury to evaluate the expert’s opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages: H.B. 2661 (2004).
Extends the sunset provision on the limit on noneconomic damages for ob/gyn’s and emergency care situations (S.B. 629, 2003) from July 1, 2008 until November 1, 2010.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages: SB 629 (2003): 63 O.S. § 1-1708.1F.
Limits the award of noneconomic damages to $350,000 in cases involving pregnancy (labor, delivery, and post partum period) as well as emergency care.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: SB 33 (2011);N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-21.19.
Limits noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $500,000 against all defendants. The limit is subject to adjustments, every three years starting on January 1, 2014, based on the Consumer Price Index. The legislation does provide for an exception to the limit if: (1) the plaintiff suffered disfigurement, loss of use of part of the body, permanent injury or death; and (2) the defendant’s acts or failures, which are the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries, were committed in reckless disregard of the rights of others, grossly negligent, fraudulent, intentional or with malice.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: H.B.2 (special session) (2002); Amended Miss. Code Ann. § 85-5-7.
Limits noneconomic damages to $500,000 until July 1, 2011, $750,000 from July 1, 2011 until July 1, 2017, and $1 million after July 1, 2017, not adjusted for inflation, unless a judge were to determine that a jury could impose punitive damages. Prohibits the disclosure to a jury of the noneconomic damages limit.
Ensures that a full 91-day period is given to defendants who submit an affidavit of meritorious defense and ends the practice of prejudgment interest being awarded on attorney fees and costs in medical liability cases.
Classifies the loss of household or other services, loss of companionship and loss of consortium as noneconomic damages.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages: SB 270/H 2 (1993): Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.1483.
Limits the award of noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $280,000 for ordinary occurrences, and $500,000 if the claimant has suffered brain damage, spinal cord damage, damage to the reproductive system which prevents procreation, or injury to cognitive ability that leaves the plaintiff unable to live alone.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages: CS/SB6 (1988): Fla. Stat. §§ 766.207, 766.209.
Limits noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $250,000 in arbitration. Limits noneconomic damages in medical liability cases to $350,000, if the plaintiff refuses to arbitrate. Sets no limit on noneconomic damages in medical liability cases, where neither party demands binding arbitration, or where the defendant refuses to arbitrate.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 03-1007 (2003).
Limits noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases to $300,000.
Medical Liability Reform: Punitive Damages: HB 1069 (1990).
Provides that punitive damages shall not be alleged in a professional negligence suit until discovery is substantially completed. Provides that discovery cannot be reopened without an amended pleading. Provides that physicians cannot be held liable for punitive damages because of the bad outcome of a prescription medication as long as it was administered in compliance with current FDA protocols. Prohibits punitive damages from being assessed against physicians because of the act of another unless he directed the act or ratified it.
Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: SB 143 (1988): Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302.
Limits the total award of damages to $1,000,000, of which no more than $250,000 can be for noneconomic damages. The $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages in medical liability actions is constitutional. Scholz v. Metropolitan Pathologists, P.C., No. 92‑8A277, Co. Sup. Ct., April 26, 1993.
Medical Liability Reform: Wrongful Death: (1987).
Limits damages in wrongful death actions to $1 million.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 55
 v. 
 § 1
 § 90
 § 85
 § 600
 § 13
 v.