Governor HaslamTells Brain Injured Tennesseans Their Injuries are not Catastrophic and Tells Tennessee Voters They are Stupid and Must be Controlled from Nashville
AppId is over the quota
Home > Legal Issues > Governor HaslamTells Brain Injured Tennesseans Their Injuries are not Catastrophic and Tells Tennessee Voters They are Stupid and Must be Controlled from NashvillePosted on June 19, 2011 by Morgan Adams
Governor Haslam has signed a law that states that non-economic damages should be capped in injury (tort) cases In Tennessee at $750,000 in most cases. Now in Tennessee juries are trusted to sentence a man to death, but apparently they are not trusted by the Governor to determine the proper amount of compensation for victims of someone else's wrongdoing in an injury case. There is not even a "three strikes and you're out" rule for really bad people and corporations that are repeat offenders!
Whether you agree or disagree with jury limits doesn't really matter, as the Tennessee Legislature and Governor Haslam can pass whatever legislation they want, and apparently they wanted to limit the amount of non-economic damages that can be received from someone injured by a wrongdoer. The new law is flawed in several aspects in my opinion.
First there is the hypocrisy in allowing "unlimited" damages against those that commit intentional acts. That sounds great but the Governor and legislators know that NO INSURANCE POLICY IN TENNESSEE WILL PAY FOR AN INTENTIONAL ACT. It is EXCLUDED from the policy. Thus an an injured victim will likely get less money, not more, if you prove the defendant acted intentionally. It sounds good on a stump speech, but in reality this section of the law gives nothing and takes away everything form the injured. The Governor could have easily required insurance companies to cover these acts, but chose not to do so.
The second level of the legislature's and Governor's hypocrisy is that juror's WONT BE TOLD that there are limits in place. They believe that they helped someone, when in reality the government took it away and made them sweat out determining the amount of non-economic damages above $750,000 in the jury room for NO PURPOSE.
The final part of this tragedy is that the Governor will allow some catastrophically injured Tennesseans to receive more than others. There is a special category for "catastrophic loss," which would raise the cap for non-economic damages in cases involving serious spinal cord injuries, severe burns, some severe multiple amputations, or the death of a parent of minor children. Now this new law excludes parents of adult special needs children, children taking care of the elderly (don't worry, they can go to a state run nursing home), victims with brain injuries, twenty year olds who have to wear diapers, or a bag, to catch excrement and waste fluids, chronic pain, etc...
Shouldn't we let a jury, on a case by case basis, decide if these cases are catastrophic after hearing the all facts? Shouldn't we let a jury decide that if you kill enough Tennesseans, you are going to get put out of business? Do parents taking care of special needs adult children, really deserve less than parents taking care of minor children? The Governor and legislature chose to take away these choices from the jury. Some Tennesseans are now more different than others and none of us are as special as corporations.
Many of my clients are brain injured, and catastrophically so, even if they are able to walk and talk. Their lives, as they knew them prior to the wreck, are over. In many case their personalities have changed. They died, but their life goes on. I find it arbitrary, and frankly an abuse of power, that the Governor has decided who can be catastrophically injured in advance of knowing all the facts. That Nashville knows better than a jury of 12 Tennesseans. I guess I trust the people of Tennessee more than those in office now. Voter's of Tennessee, your governor and your legislature just called you too stupid to do what is right in a jury box. (they also called the Judge, lawyers in the case, the Courts of Appeal and the Tennessee Supreme Court too stupid to get it as well, but hey, they were on a roll.) Voters you need to remember this come November.
GOVERNOR HASLAM AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE HELP TORT LAWYERS STAY IN BUSINESS
AppId is over the quota
Posted on June 21, 2011 by Morgan Adams
Yes, that’s right, GOVERNOR HASLAM AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE HELP TORT LAWYERS STAY IN BUSINESS! I was too hasty with my earlier post and didn’t think things though. It is the law of unintended consequences. Republican Governor Haslam, the Chamber of Commerce, and the state legislature have insured that people like me, trial lawyers, will thrive under the new law they just passed. That is how bad the new tort law (pushed by the Chamber of Commerce, the Tennessee Legislature, and signed by the Governor) capping non-economic damages is for the citizens of Tennessee.
You see in the old days in Tennessee when a company was really bad, and had killed and maimed people all across the state, a jury of 12 citizens could kill the bad corporation by compensating a victim with a sum of money that was over and above the defendant's insurance policy. This made sure that the bad company never had the opportunity to kill and maim Tennessean’s again. That might have resulted in one large verdict, but only once, and then the company went out of the business of killing the people of Tennessee.
For people the rules are different. In criminal cases we have a "three strikes" rule. Hurt three people and you go away for a long, long, time. If it is bad enough, a person can get the death penalty and to heck with the three strikes rule. Thanks to the Chamber of Commerce's new tort liability law the bad companies get to stay in business. There is no three strikes rule, heck there isn’t even a twenty strikes rule. There is no death penalty. Bad companies in Tennessee get to live (and hurt and maim) forever.
Under the new law the amount that can be awarded by a jury is limited, or capped, and is so low it is easily covered by a corporation’s insurance. Thus a really bad company gets to stay in business and will continue to kill and maim as long as the business is profitable. It can take risks now that it never could before.
Every bad act of the company that results in another victim will likely result in yet another law suit, a process that can no longer be stopped in Tennessee by killing the company. In fact, thanks to the Chamber of the Commerce we no longer have a way of driving unsafe companies out of our state. Mind you this is a law I fought against (having spent 22 years in the Marine Corps I have this thing about trying to protect Americans and keep them alive) as it is terrible for Tennessee.
Some corporations, and some people, need to be put somewhere their actions can’t hurt anyone else. Sometimes, if the act is bad enough, that means killing them. In Tennessee corporations can now kill at will without fear of ever being placed out of business by a lawsuit.
The next time you pass a graveyard thank the Governor, your Tennessee legislator, and the Chamber of Commerce. With the new law they passed protecting those companies that habitually maim and kill, the death and injury rate for the common person in Tennessee is going to go up, and our graveyards are going to fill.
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URLhttp://www.truckinjurylawyerblog.com/admin/trackback/251920
Important bicycling safety measure now before the Governor of California
AppId is over the quota
Posted on Wednesday, October 5th, 2011 
Just last week we wrote about an unfortunate accident involving a cyclist and a San Francisco Muni bus that left the cyclist with a badly crushed arm. The incident took place, both sides agree, when the cyclist was forced to change lanes by an illegally parked vehicle. The bus, as is the case with the majority of bicycle accidents, approached the cyclist from the rear.
These sort of accidents, where space for vehicles to pass is scarce, are the kind that make cyclists feel unsafe about biking to work or for leisure in an urban environment. They are also exactly the type of accidents that SB 910, a safe passage bill for bicyclists, seeks to minimize through legislation.
A part of the California Bicycle Coalition’s Give Me 3 campaign, SB 910 would formalize the way that most drivers and cyclists already interact by requiring passing vehicles to give bicyclists at least three feet of space when passing from behind.
It would be a smart move for the state, and CBC lays out the reasoning succinctly on their website:
“Nineteen other states have already enacted a specified minimum passing distance for motorists. The nation’s newest 3-foot passing law took effect in Georgia on July 1, 2011.
A specified passing distance provides drivers with a more objective and easily understood measure of what constitutes “safe” and gives law enforcement and the courts a more objective basis for enforcing California’s safe passing requirement. Most importantly, it helps emphasize a driver’s special responsibility to safeguard more vulnerable road users like bicyclists.”
This last point is important. Often drivers are surprised by sudden adjustments a cyclist may be forced to make. With a mandatory three-foot berth, drivers will be better prepared to respond themselves, and help everyone stay out of potentially life-threatening circumstances.
Initially the progress of this bill was heartening and it passed through the California Legislature on September 8. The bill has now been sent to Governor Brown to be signed into law.
If you would like to improve cyclist safety and encourage Governor Brown to sign SB 910, you can send him a letter. Make sharing the road easier and safer by helping California become the twentieth state to take this important step.
Photo credit: Richard Masoner
Bellevue Car Accident Lawyer | Governor Gregoire Involved in Car Accident
AppId is over the quota
As a Seattle car accident lawyer, I see how important it is for drivers to adjust their driving to account for poor road conditions on our highways. As we enter the rainy season here in Western Washington, we need to remember to drive slower and leave greater following distance when the roads are slick from rain. In an article in the Seattle Times, the State Patrol indicated that there were a number of mishaps on the road caused by Monday’s rain; notable among those incidents was one involving Gov. Gregoire. The governor’s vehicle, driven by her State Patrol security detail, was sideswiped on I-5 in Des Moines. The State Patrol released no further information on the incident other than that no one was injured in the accident, which occurred at about 2:00 in the afternoon as Gov. Gregoire was heading back to Olympia after an event in Seattle.
The State of Washington’s Target Zero initiative estimates that about 40% of fatal crashes in Washington are speeding-related, with over 200 fatalities. Speeding-related car accidents in Washington also account over 800 serious injuries annually. What we all need to understand as Washington drivers is that, when road conditions deteriorate, driving at the posted speed limit may be considered speeding. Many legal principles, especially when it comes to civil law, are based on the hypothetical reasonable person test. When weather, potholes, traffic, or any other situation cause road conditions to deteriorate to a level where a reasonable person would feel the need to drive below the speed limit, then that is exactly what each of us needs to do.
If you have been injured in a car accident caused by a driver failing to yield to poor road conditions, you need to talk with a Seattle car accident attorney who has experience with these types of cases. Negligence can be difficult to determine under the best of circumstances, and when trying to decide whether the speed limit was too fast for prevailing conditions, Seattle car crash attorney Jason Epstein can help. Jason has worked with many victims of negligent drivers, and knows how to protect your legal rights. For more information, and a FREE CASE EVALUATION, contact Jason at Premier Law Group at (206)285-1743.
Tags: Bellevue auto accident attorney, Governor gregoire car accident, Governor Gregoire hit on I-5, Governor Gregoire involved in car accident, Olympia car accident attorney, seattle car accident lawyer, seattle personal injury attorney
Tweet
Texas Governor Rick Perry veto ban texting driving
Despite numerous protests and evidence, the legislator in Austin, which drive distracted is an incredibly dangerous epidemic that is rapidly growing out of control, Governor Rick Perry veto of House Bill 242, which would have made illegal SMS while driving in Texas. In its official said Perry, "texting while driving reckless and irresponsible." "I support measures to make safer, our roads for all but House Bill 242 is a Government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults."
Perry claimed that HB 242 would have a descent of the Government, but it confused me, as he came to this conclusion. How does a law to protect the welfare of the public equal tyranny of the State? If Governor Perry against legislation like HB 242, that is us "Micromanage", laws, laws then must he also against DWI and driving without insurance laws be. We should not laws to to tell us not to drink and we have to do but drive or text and drive.
It seems to me that Governor Perry in conjunction with the State of Texas. There was little opposition to this Bill in its necessary Committee hearings; Indeed Telecommunications giant support banning SMS such as AT & T, actually during the journey. Not only this law have democratic and Republican support, but the majority of respondents in a survey by Texas Transportation Institute last year Texas drivers prefer a ban on cell phone while driving.
Politics aside, SMS laws not you charge if you SMS and drive are and if they can save a life, they are the value of it. If I was rating on its decision, this much-needed anti-SMS and driving Bill veto Rick Perry, we'd him an F.
Virginia Med will not increase time CAP, thanks to Governor, McDonnell
A real slap in the face for the patients.
The news shocked Virginia House and Senate, as word got out that Governor Bob McDonnell the proposed medical malpractice damages cap boost veto. Not only legislators were surprised by this unexpected turn of events, but trial lawyers, doctors and insurance companies, not to mention most of the population of Virginia, were also caught by surprise.
Currently, the Commonwealth of Virginia has a medical malpractice damages cap of $2 million. This means that if you were injured by medical malpractice and your medical expenses income lost and other damages go over $ 2 million, you are out of luck. While this seems high enough amount if you are stuck with a permanent injury or condition, it does not come close even, what have you probably lost to your life by medical bills, salaries, and more to cover.
The Bill, the Gov't McDonnell veto not extravagant by any means. It was the result of years of hard work by medical practices lobbyists, trial lawyers, lobbyists and patients lobbyists. If the Bill had passed, damages would have received medical malpractice able, up to $3 million. Keep in mind this law would have helped the medical malpractice victims who most need this money.
The CAP would have increased gradually, year up from $50,000 to 2031.
So confusing to Governor McDonnell actions was that so many people for this law, including insurers, lawyers, were physicians and patients. She worked tirelessly come with some kind of CAP, would be fair to everyone.
Apparently, our were Governor of Virginia.
One comment to "Virginia Med time CAP, thanks not to Governor, McDonnell increased"
Message:
Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.
Off for security reasons, enter the image text in the box below: [press F5 when you can't read the text]
Governor Haslam tells brain injured people and parents of special needs children, their injuries are not disastrous
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9158.
Governor Haslam has proposed that non-economic damages should be capped in injury (tort) cases. In Tennessee juries are trusted to sentence a man to death, but apparently the Governor does not trust a jury, in injury cases, to determine the proper amount of compensation for victims of someone else’s wrongdoing. Did you get that? Governor Haslam is protecting the wrongdoers at the expense of their victims. This law does not apply to corporations, only to people like you and me. Corporations, who can only be injured economically, get every penny a jury finds owed to them, even if it is a lot.
Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't really matter, as the Tennessee Legislature is controlled by Governor Haslam's party and they can pass whatever legislation they want. Apparently they want to limit the amount of non-economic damages that can be received from someone injured by a wrongdoer.
So what does this mean? First, let’s talk about the wrongdoers.
If you intentionally injure someone in the process of committing a crime (that doesn't constitute a felony) you don't have to pay as much. The Governor is going to protect you from a runaway Tennessee Jury! The Governor is looking out for the rights of Mr. Wrongdoer and the victims' damages are going to be capped. (Lets be fair, the money coming to you as compensation for your actual damages will be limited or capped, there is still a chance to get punitive damages, but these are rarely awarded and, if they are awarded, are taxable. So the only full damages you get in these case are the ones in which the government gets a part.). A sexual abuse victim has personal problems? "Suck it up" says the Governor. The wrongdoer causes your child or spouse to be brain injured so that they can never interact socially with their class or peers? Move on says the Governor, “I need to protect these wrongdoers.” So that is the first part of the reform Governor Haslam feels compelled to pass on behalf of the wrongdoers in the state of Tennessee.
The second part of this tragedy is that the Governor will allow some catastrophically injured Tennesseans to receive more than others. According to KnoxNews.com The administration late last week released changes to the bill that would create a special category for "catastrophic loss," which would raise the cap for non-economic damages in cases involving serious spinal cord injuries, severe burns or the death of a parent of minor children. Now these few categories excludes all brain injuries, apparently they are not catastrophic. Having to wear a urine drainage bag or diapers to catch your excrement and fluids as a twenty year old, chronic pain, etc... not catastrophic. Unable to ever have children because of someones wrongdoing? Not catastrophic. Does the Governor really believe he is all seeing and all knowing? Shouldn't we let a jury, on a case by case basis, decide this after hearing all the facts? I guess if you don’t trust the people of the state of Tennessee to do the right thing…
Now I have to admit many of my clients are brain injured, and catastrophically so even if they are able to walk and talk. Their lives, as they knew them prior to the wreck, are over. In many cases their personalities have changed and they are not the same spouse or parent they used to be. They get divorced and estranged from their kids. They have to move in with their children and need to be monitored. They essentially died, but their life goes on.
This bill will impact many of my clients with brain injuries, and they will get less, and their families will get less. I find it arbitrary, and frankly an abuse of power, that the Governor has decided who can be classed as catastrophically injured in advance of knowing all the facts. I believe he should leave it up to a jury of 12 Tennesseans, hearing the facts of a case, to decide the issue.
Then their are the parents of special needs children. If you die it is not a catastrophic loss according to the Governor. Only if the children are minors can you get more, but still not the full amount of your damages. If you have adult special needs children? So sorry, you are out of luck. That is not catastrophic says the Governor. Take care of a parent that now needs to go into a nursing home? Not catastrophic says the Governor. It seems to me that if the legislature allowed catastrophic damages to any Tennessean that dies with a dependent it would be fairer (still limited in recovery, but at least not pitting one group against another and saying you don't deserve as much as others with dependents.).
Finally, no one, not even the judge, can tell members of the jury this travesty is happening. After the jury renders a fair verdict, the judge is required to cut it down and make it unfair to the victim. Note that if the original verdict was against the evidence, and unfair to the defendant, the law already requires the verdict to be reduced. This new law only impacts victims.
A copy of the Governor's shameful bill may be found here. You don’t think this is fair? Call your state representatives now (you can find your representatives here), but don’t expect them to change their minds, because you are just the sort of whacked out Tennessee citizen that might one day be on a jury... and the Governor doesn't trust you.
The Governor's proposed law, relevant sections in bold:
29-39-102.
(a) In any personal injury or wrongful death action, the prevailing
plaintiff may be awarded:
(1) Compensation for economic damages suffered by the
injured plaintiff; and
(2) Compensation for any noneconomic damages suffered
by each injured plaintiff not to exceed seven hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($750,000).
(b) If multiple defendants are found liable under the principle of
comparative fault, the amount of all noneconomic damages, not to
exceed seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) for each injured
plaintiff, shall be apportioned among the defendants based upon the
percentage of fault for each defendant, so long as the plaintiff's
comparative fault is not equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%).
(c) All noneconomic damages awarded to each injured plaintiff,
including damages for pain and suffering, as well as any claims of a
spouse or children for loss of consortium or any derivative claim for
noneconomic damages, shall not exceed in the aggregate a total of seven
hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000).
(d) If an injury or loss is catastrophic in nature, as defined below,
the seven hundred fifty thousand dollar ($750,000) amount for
noneconomic damages, as set forth in subsections (a)(2) through (c) may
be increased to, but shall not exceed, one million two hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($1,250,000).
(e) "Catastrophic loss or injury" means one or more of the
following:
(1) Spinal cord injury resulting in paraplegia, hemiplegia or
quadriplegia;
(2) Amputation of two hands, two feet or one of each;
(3) Second or third degree burns over forty percent (40%)
or more of the body as a whole or third degree bums up to forty
percent (40%) percent or more of the face; or
(4) Death of a parent who is survived by one or more
minor children.
(f) The limitation on the amount of noneconomic damages
imposed by subsections (a)(2) through (e) shall not apply to actions
brought for damages or an injury resulting from an act or omission by a
defendant:
(1) If the defendant committed an act or omission that
would constitute a felony under the laws of this state or under
federal law and that act or omission caused the damages or
injuries; or
(2) If the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or
under the influence of drugs other than lawfully prescribed drugs
administered in accordance with a prescription.
Governor HaslamTells brain injured people their injuries Tennessee not fateful and told voters they are stupid are and must be controlled from Nashville
Governor Haslam has signed a law that says that non-economic damages in injury (tort) in Tennessee at $750,000 in most cases should be limited. Now in Tennessee, juries are trusted so that you have a to condemn a man to death, but apparently they are not trusted by the Governor, other misconduct in the case of a breach to determine, the right amount of compensation for victims of someone. There is not even a "three strikes and you are out" rule for really bad people and companies, are the repeat offenders!
Whether you agree or disagree with jury borders doesn't really matter, such as the Tennessee legislature and Governor Haslam which legislation passed they want, and they can non-economic damages that injured can be received by someone from a wrongdoer apparently wanted the limit. The new law is flawed in some respects my opinion.
There is first the hypocrisy in so that the intentional acts to "unlimited" damages against those. The Governor and legislature sounds great, but, that number will pay insurance policy IN TENNESSEE for an intentional act. It is excluded from the directive. So a an injured victims probably receive less money no longer, if you prove the defendant willfully traded. It sounds good on a speech stump, but in reality in this section of the law, nothing is, and everything takes form the injured. The Governor could have easily need to cover these acts of insurance companies, but decided not to do.
The second level of the legislature and the Governor is hypocrisy, juror wont be said that there are limits. They believe that they helped someone, when in reality the Government took it on and they sweat made non-economic damages of 750,000 in the jury room of determining the amount no. purposes.
The last part of this tragedy is that the Governor more than others receive allows some catastrophically injured people. There is a special category for "catastrophic loss", which some serious cross-cutting problems, severe burns, the CAP for non-economic damages in cases where serious multiple amputations or the death of a parent of minor children would increase. Now, this new law includes the parents of adult special needs children, children takes care of older people (don't worry, they can go, perform a state nursing home), victims, chronic pain, etc. Hirnverletzte, twenty-year-old, the diapers or a bag to catch, faeces and waste wear...
Let should not we decide a jury, on a case by case basis, whether these cases are disastrous after hearing all the facts? Let should not we choose a jury, that when you kill enough people, you are out to get out of business? Parents have under the supervision of disabled adult children, really earn less than parents take care of minors? The Governor and the legislature chose to take these decisions of the jury. Some people are now more than any other different and company are none of us something special.
Many of my clients are injured, brain and disastrously so, even if they are able to walk and talk. Their lives, they are as in they knew to the wreck, over. In many cases, their personalities have changed. She died, but their life goes on. I think it is arbitrary, and honest said an abuse of power that the Governor has decided, in the run-up to know all the facts can be catastrophically injured. The Nashville knows better than a jury of 12 further. I guess I more than that in the hope the people of Tennessee now. Voter's Tennessee, just referred you to do your Governor and your legislature, what correctly in a jury box is stupid. (it is also as judges, lawyers in the case of the courts of appeal and the Tennessee Supreme Court too stupid, get it also, but hey, they have been on a roll.) Voters, they must come November.
GOVERNOR HASLAM AND THE COMMERCE HELP OF TORTIOUS ACT LAWYERS REMAIN IN THE BUSINESS
Yes, that's right, Governor HASLAM and THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE will help lawyers keep TORT IN BUSINESS! I was with my previous post went and things but do not believe. It is the law of unintended consequences. Republican Governor Haslam, the Chamber of Commerce and the legislation have assured that people like me, study will thrive lawyers under the new law passed only. This is how bad the new tort right (pushed by the Chamber of Commerce, the Tennessee legislature and signed by the Governor) limit is non-economic damages for the citizens of Tennessee.
You see in the old days in Tennessee, when a company was really bad and killed had and garbled anywhere in the State, a jury of 12 people the bad Corporation of compensation of the victims with a sum of money, which was on the defendant insurance policy could kill people. This ensured that the bad company never had the opportunity to kill and maim Tennesseans again. You may have led a great judgment, but only once, and then the company of the activity of the people of Tennessee went to kill.
The rules differ for people. In criminal matters, we have usually "three strikes". Three people injured and you get long off for a long time. If it is bad enough, a person can the death penalty and to the Devil with the three strikes rule. The bad companies get thanks to the Chamber of Commerce new offence liable to stay in business. There is no rule three strikes, heck it not even usually twenty strikes. There is no death penalty. To life (and injure and maim) always get bad company in Tennessee.
The new law the amount that can be awarded by a jury is limited, or limited, and is so low, it easily falls by a company, insurance. This a really bad company gets to stay in business and continue to kill and maim, as long as the business is profitable. It can take risks now that it could never before.
Every bad action of the company, that results in another victim will probably suit, a process which can no longer be stopped in Tennessee by killing the company lead to yet a different law. In fact, thanks to the Chamber of commerce we have a kind of no longer driving unsafe companies of our State. Mind you, this is a law, that I fought against (after he had 22 years in the Marine Corps I this thing to try, the Americans protect and keep them alive) as it is terrible for Tennessee.
Some companies and some people need to can harm anywhere their actions anyone not be set. Sometimes, if the law is bad enough, means that to kill them. Kill in Tennessee company can out now without worrying about getting out of business placed by an action.
The next time you pass the Governor, the Tennessee legislature, and the Chamber of Commerce thank a graveyard. With the new law to protect these companies, which maim their habitual residence passed and kill, the death and injury rate for the common person in Tennessee will increase, and our cemeteries go to fill.
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs, on this point article Trackback URLhttp://www.truckinjurylawyerblog.com/Admin/Trackback/251920
Virginia Med will not increase time CAP, thanks to Governor McDonnell
A real slap in the face for the patients.
The news shocked Virginia House and Senate, as word got out that Governor Bob McDonnell the proposed malpractice damages cap boost veto. Not only legislators were surprised by this unexpected turn of events, but trial lawyers, doctors and insurance companies, not to mention most of the population of Virginia, were also caught by surprise.
Currently, the Commonwealth of Virginia has a medical malpractice damages cap of $2 million. This means, if you were injured by medical malpractice and medical costs, lost revenue and other damages go over $ 2 million, you are out of luck. While this seems high enough amount if you are stuck with a permanent injury or condition, it does not come close even, what have you probably lost to your life by medical bills, salaries, and more to cover.
The Bill, the Gov't McDonnell veto not extravagant with all means. It was the result of years of hard work by medical practices lobbyists, trial lawyers, lobbyists and patients lobbyists. If the Bill had passed, damages would have medical malpractice victims able, up to $3 million. Keep in mind, this law would have the medical malpractice victims who most need this money helped.
The CAP would be increased gradually, up from $ 50,000 per year to 2031.
So confusing to Governor McDonnell actions was that so many people for this law, including insurers, lawyers, were physicians and patients. She worked tirelessly to get any kind of CAP, would be fair to everyone.
Apparently, our were Governor of Virginia.
One comment to "Virginia Med time Cap not boost, thanks to Governor McDonnell"
Message:
Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.
For security purposes, you give the graphic text in the box below: [press F5 if you can't read the text]
Governor Haslam tells brain injured people and parents of special needs children, their injuries are not disastrous
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9184.
Governor Haslam has proposed that non-economic damages should be capped in injury (tort) cases. In Tennessee juries are trusted to sentence a man to death, but apparently the Governor does not trust a jury, in injury cases, to determine the proper amount of compensation for victims of someone else’s wrongdoing. Did you get that? Governor Haslam is protecting the wrongdoers at the expense of their victims. This law does not apply to corporations, only to people like you and me. Corporations, who can only be injured economically, get every penny a jury finds owed to them, even if it is a lot.
Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't really matter, as the Tennessee Legislature is controlled by Governor Haslam's party and they can pass whatever legislation they want. Apparently they want to limit the amount of non-economic damages that can be received from someone injured by a wrongdoer.
So what does this mean? First, let’s talk about the wrongdoers.
If you intentionally injure someone in the process of committing a crime (that doesn't constitute a felony) you don't have to pay as much. The Governor is going to protect you from a runaway Tennessee Jury! The Governor is looking out for the rights of Mr. Wrongdoer and the victims' damages are going to be capped. (Lets be fair, the money coming to you as compensation for your actual damages will be limited or capped, there is still a chance to get punitive damages, but these are rarely awarded and, if they are awarded, are taxable. So the only full damages you get in these case are the ones in which the government gets a part.). A sexual abuse victim has personal problems? "Suck it up" says the Governor. The wrongdoer causes your child or spouse to be brain injured so that they can never interact socially with their class or peers? Move on says the Governor, “I need to protect these wrongdoers.” So that is the first part of the reform Governor Haslam feels compelled to pass on behalf of the wrongdoers in the state of Tennessee.
The second part of this tragedy is that the Governor will allow some catastrophically injured Tennesseans to receive more than others. According to KnoxNews.com The administration late last week released changes to the bill that would create a special category for "catastrophic loss," which would raise the cap for non-economic damages in cases involving serious spinal cord injuries, severe burns or the death of a parent of minor children. Now these few categories excludes all brain injuries, apparently they are not catastrophic. Having to wear a urine drainage bag or diapers to catch your excrement and fluids as a twenty year old, chronic pain, etc... not catastrophic. Unable to ever have children because of someones wrongdoing? Not catastrophic. Does the Governor really believe he is all seeing and all knowing? Shouldn't we let a jury, on a case by case basis, decide this after hearing all the facts? I guess if you don’t trust the people of the state of Tennessee to do the right thing…
Now I have to admit many of my clients are brain injured, and catastrophically so even if they are able to walk and talk. Their lives, as they knew them prior to the wreck, are over. In many cases their personalities have changed and they are not the same spouse or parent they used to be. They get divorced and estranged from their kids. They have to move in with their children and need to be monitored. They essentially died, but their life goes on.
This bill will impact many of my clients with brain injuries, and they will get less, and their families will get less. I find it arbitrary, and frankly an abuse of power, that the Governor has decided who can be classed as catastrophically injured in advance of knowing all the facts. I believe he should leave it up to a jury of 12 Tennesseans, hearing the facts of a case, to decide the issue.
Then their are the parents of special needs children. If you die it is not a catastrophic loss according to the Governor. Only if the children are minors can you get more, but still not the full amount of your damages. If you have adult special needs children? So sorry, you are out of luck. That is not catastrophic says the Governor. Take care of a parent that now needs to go into a nursing home? Not catastrophic says the Governor. It seems to me that if the legislature allowed catastrophic damages to any Tennessean that dies with a dependent it would be fairer (still limited in recovery, but at least not pitting one group against another and saying you don't deserve as much as others with dependents.).
Finally, no one, not even the judge, can tell members of the jury this travesty is happening. After the jury renders a fair verdict, the judge is required to cut it down and make it unfair to the victim. Note that if the original verdict was against the evidence, and unfair to the defendant, the law already requires the verdict to be reduced. This new law only impacts victims.
A copy of the Governor's shameful bill may be found here. You don’t think this is fair? Call your state representatives now (you can find your representatives here), but don’t expect them to change their minds, because you are just the sort of whacked out Tennessee citizen that might one day be on a jury... and the Governor doesn't trust you.
The Governor's proposed law, relevant sections in bold:
29-39-102.
(a) In any personal injury or wrongful death action, the prevailing
plaintiff may be awarded:
(1) Compensation for economic damages suffered by the
injured plaintiff; and
(2) Compensation for any noneconomic damages suffered
by each injured plaintiff not to exceed seven hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($750,000).
(b) If multiple defendants are found liable under the principle of
comparative fault, the amount of all noneconomic damages, not to
exceed seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) for each injured
plaintiff, shall be apportioned among the defendants based upon the
percentage of fault for each defendant, so long as the plaintiff's
comparative fault is not equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%).
(c) All noneconomic damages awarded to each injured plaintiff,
including damages for pain and suffering, as well as any claims of a
spouse or children for loss of consortium or any derivative claim for
noneconomic damages, shall not exceed in the aggregate a total of seven
hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000).
(d) If an injury or loss is catastrophic in nature, as defined below,
the seven hundred fifty thousand dollar ($750,000) amount for
noneconomic damages, as set forth in subsections (a)(2) through (c) may
be increased to, but shall not exceed, one million two hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($1,250,000).
(e) "Catastrophic loss or injury" means one or more of the
following:
(1) Spinal cord injury resulting in paraplegia, hemiplegia or
quadriplegia;
(2) Amputation of two hands, two feet or one of each;
(3) Second or third degree burns over forty percent (40%)
or more of the body as a whole or third degree bums up to forty
percent (40%) percent or more of the face; or
(4) Death of a parent who is survived by one or more
minor children.
(f) The limitation on the amount of noneconomic damages
imposed by subsections (a)(2) through (e) shall not apply to actions
brought for damages or an injury resulting from an act or omission by a
defendant:
(1) If the defendant committed an act or omission that
would constitute a felony under the laws of this state or under
federal law and that act or omission caused the damages or
injuries; or
(2) If the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or
under the influence of drugs other than lawfully prescribed drugs
administered in accordance with a prescription.
