State House Puts Off Action on Governor’s Tort Reform Rewrite

Tennessee lawmakers heard more testimony Wednesday on the governor’s tort reform bill that would cap financial awards in some personal injury lawsuits. Governor Bill Haslam has amended his bill to raise those caps, but lawmakers put off a decision on the changes.

Earlier this week, tort reform supporters began promoting a 17-page rewrite of the governor’s proposal, which would set limits on some non-economic damages that might by awarded in a civil suit.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee put off taking up that re-write but listened briefly to Tennesseans who were victims of medical or other missteps and who had to sue companies to recover damages.

Former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson has been lobbying against the tort reform measure. He says the new caps offered in the governor’s amendment – higher than the original figures – improve the bill.

“If you’re gonna have caps, it needs to be at a reasonable level. The governor’s caps are better than some …they’re not quite what I would prefer.”

Lawmakers are expected to take up the new version of the tort reform bill for a full debate next week.

WEB EXTRA
Thompson says the committee is working through a process that often yields unpopular results.

“We’re all struggling to come up with the right mix, and usually it’s a bag full of stuff, some of which you like and some of which you don’t.”

The bill is HB 2008 McCormick/SB 1522 Norris.

As of the time of this story, the state still had not posted the govenor’s extensive amendment on the state legislative web site.
A copy of the draft amendment is here, but it isn’t official since it hasn’t been acted upon by a committee of either legislative house.

Thompson, a long-time trial lawyer (those who bring such actions in court, as opposed to the “plaintiff’s bar,” who defend the accused companies) says that unrealistically low caps can get in the way of “making whole” a badly hurt plaintiff.

“Doesn’t happen that often…. Caps are relevant only in extreme cases, but when they become relevant, they’re very relevant.”

Thompson says the governor’s addition of “catastrophic” injuries – like spinal cord injuries, or multiple amputations – to those which could be awarded higher damages is an improvement.

But he suggests other improvements:

“There’s not a provision in there to cover brain injuries, for example, so I think it could be improved by the addition of catastrophic brain injuries. So ….again, it’s a mixed bag, and that’s what we’re working through.”