Quantcast

Reform package targets perception of Pennsylvania courts as pro-plaintiff lawyer

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Saturday, December 21, 2024

Reform package targets perception of Pennsylvania courts as pro-plaintiff lawyer

Legislation
Torrenecker

Ecker | https://www.repecker.com/

HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania lawmakers are addressing the state's reputation as a haven for personal injury lawyers by introducing legislation that would reform issues like contingency fees and outside funding for lawsuits.

Rep. Torren Ecker, a Republican from Adams County, and others unveiled their plan on Oct. 9. The package also features measures that would overturn court decisions that subject out-of-state corporations to jurisdiction in Pennsylvania simply because they agreed to sell their product there.

And it seeks to put medical malpractice lawsuits back in the counties where injuries occurred, rather than having plaintiffs lawyers flock to Philadelphia to attempt to score windfall verdicts. Though not med-mal cases, the tendency for jackpots was on display the day after Ecker's press conference, when a Philadelphia jury awarded $75 million in punitive damages to a man who blamed his blood cancer on Roundup weedkiller, the third staggering award in Roundup cases in the past year won by Kline & Specter.

"(W)e are committed to enacting legislation that protects both individuals and businesses while ensuring fairness for all," Ecker said.

"One of the most pressing concerns is the burden of excessive litigation, which stifles growth and dries up costs for families and businesses alike."

The state's health care industry is under fire from lawsuits filed in favorable venues like Philadelphia, Ecker said. That started in recent years, following a state Supreme Court committee's change to the way med-mal cases are filed.

Beginning in 2002, plaintiffs could only sue in the counties where they were injured. But 20 years later, the Civil Procedural Rules Committee took it upon itself to allow cases against defendants in counties where they do business or have established ties.

That decision undid a legal reform measure passed to address rising malpractice insurance costs for health care providers and received plenty of criticism, with the state's legal reform group calling it a gift to plaintiffs lawyers.

"Judicial legislating from the bench coupled with pro-plaintiff attorney legislation have expanded the scope of liability in the Commonwealth's most pressing liability issues," said Curt Schroder of Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform.

Also in recent years, out-of-state companies lost the ability to fight lawsuits in their home states when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Norfolk Southern Railway could face litigation in Pennsylvania. Justices reasoned Norfolk Southern consented to jurisdiction in Pennsylvania by choosing to do business there.

This led to a situation in which a Virginia man sued over injuries there and in Ohio in Philadelphia, a court that commonly chosen by out-of-state plaintiffs. Proposed legislation would eliminate that consent-to-jurisdiction as a condition of registering to do business.

And many of the cases affected would be pursued by contingency fee lawyers, who will no doubt fight another proposed measure. This one caps contingency fees, allowing lawyers to take only 15% of any verdict of more than $600,000. 

(A ballot initiative in Nevada would cap fees at 20%.)

Other proposed legislation in Pennsylvania includes:

-Undoing judicial decisions that have weakened the Fair Share Act, so that minimally at-fault defendants aren't responsible for entire verdicts;

-Removing the Supreme Court's power over the practice law to give legislators more authority to pass court rules;

-Requiring companies that fund litigation in exchange for a percentage of the profits to disclose themselves and their contracts; and

-Allowing defendants to introduce evidence in vehicle accident cases that the injured wasn't wearing a seatbelt, which seems like common sense but in Georgia never was seriously considered.

The seatbelt issue arose recently in Philadelphia, when a trial was set to begin over a fatal tractor-trailer crash. The plaintiff filed a motion to prevent defendant Freightline from telling jurors the victim wasn't wearing his seatbelt, but a settlement was reached before a federal judge could ever rule on it.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News