The latest victory for greedy trial lawyers has come just next door to Missouri in Illinois, where the state Supreme Court has ruled that a cap on non-economic damages that became law in 2005 is unconstitutional. They ruled that the cap was an infringement of the separation of powers, that it amounted to a “legislative remittitur” that interfered with the judiciary’s traditional power to determine the damages to be awarded in a case, and that such an infringement would invalidate the law in its entirety.

This is a bad decision that will cause doctors to leave Illinois and will cause patients to pay higher prices for the care they receive because protection from junk lawsuits has been eliminated. Junk lawsuits have been estimated to increase health care costs by 10% and are a major motivation for physicians who choose to retire or move their practice to avoid harsh legal climates.

For more information, please read the verdict, available here.

Today, the Missouri Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments in Klotz v. St. Anthony’s, a case which challenges the constitutionality of the non-economic damage caps that are a part of our state’s comprehensive tort reform laws. In this case, a jury originally awarded an amount for non-economic damages that exceeded the $350,000 cap. In order to comply with state law, the court granted a motion to cut damages to $350,000. The verdict was appealed and is now before the Missouri Supreme Court.

“I hope that the court will practice judicial restraint and uphold the caps on non-economic damages,” said James Harris. “Without caps, dishonest attorneys would have an incentive to file more frivolous lawsuits, raising malpractice insurance prices, causing an exodus of doctors and raising the price of health care for everyone. Our tort reform laws are constitutional and sensible – to overturn them would be destructive and irresponsible.”

The following was printed in the Springfield News-Leader on January 1, 2010, and can be found on their website.

The fate of tort reform is now in the hands of the Missouri Supreme Court. Oral arguments in Klotz v. St. Anthony's are set for Jan. 14 , and tort reform opponents are champing at the bit for the chance to take down our state's barrier to ridiculously high non-economic damage awards. Indeed, the repeal of tort reform laws by lawyer-influenced courts has become a disturbing national pattern - approximately 138 tort reform statutes have been overturned, according to the American Tort Reform Association.

Trial lawyers, with the ability to manipulate Missouri's courts, have undoubtedly been working to make sure our judges are predisposed to rule against tort statutes that limit non-economic damages and discourage frivolous lawsuits. After all, Missouri's tort reform laws are the only thing keeping them from collecting the kind of multi-million dollar "pain and suffering" verdicts that have bought jets and mansions for lawyers in other states.

There is reason to be worried that our state could soon find itself without protection from these costly lawsuits. In Meyer ex. rel. Coplin v. Fluor Corp., the Missouri Supreme Court found that a company was responsible for paying the costs of medical monitoring for a possible future illness, a break with precedent (and common sense) that historically dictated that damages could only be recovered if the plaintiff has a demonstrable injury. It is not a stretch to imagine that a court willing to play so fast and loose with standard tort procedure would happily overturn reform statutes if given a chance.

The overturning of our current tort reform laws would threaten Missouri's ability to create economic growth. Right now, having tort reform laws on the books puts us at a comparative advantage with other states and other nations when competing for new industries. The loss of these laws would put us at a disadvantage, discouraging companies from creating new jobs in Missouri which could be created more cheaply in other states.

The economic impact of the loss of tort reform should not be underestimated: it would be absolutely devastating to our economy. The high insurance rates and other costs that plagued this state before tort reform was enacted would return and once again hamstring our economy. Medical malpractice insurance rates would skyrocket, causing doctors to leave the state in waves as they were doing before Missouri's tort reform laws were put in place. Workers compensation and health insurance premiums would rise in response to the increased cost of health care. Not only would the cost of doing business increase in Missouri, overturning tort reform would have a ripple effect that would increase the cost of living in Missouri.

I urge the people of Missouri to write your legislators to let them know that tort reform is in danger. We can only hope that the courts will respect Missouri's best interests when making this decision and let our tort limits stand. Unfortunately, it is out of our hands now.