Ga. Supremes overturn pain-and-suffering caps

[napi21]

In a decision written by Chief Justice Carol Hunstein, the court declared that putting a cap on awards for non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits is an unconstitutional violation of a citizen’s right to trial by jury.

“f the legislature may constitutionally cap recovery , there is no discernible reason why it could not cap the recovery at some other figure, perhaps $50,000, or $1,000, or even $1,” Hunstein wrote. “The very existence of the caps, in any amount, is violative (CQ) of the right to trial by jury.”


http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2010/03/22/daily9.html?ed=2010-03-22&ana=e_du_pap

I HOPE this will be used as a precident for all other States & the Feds!

[kenny blankenship]

1. I'm not very accustomed to thanking or thinking well of any branch of govt. here in GA

but praise and thanks to Justice Hunstein!

The Republicans have two spawn in jurisprudence - evil twins that look just like daddy: one is the idea that there should be no regulation on businesses. The other twin is that individuals seeking redress in the courts must be regulated as to what they can receive in damages from businesses.

[napi21]

2. I don't know if you read the article at the link, but it states that

tort reform was one of the top issues when Sonny & his gang stole the election & also got control of the General Assembly. I'm thrilled that the court kicked him and his thugh is the nuts!

[Dappleganger]

3. HAHAHAHAHA!

I would love to have seen the looks on their faces when that decision was handed down.

:rofl:

[newtothegame]

4. Not sure what to think. Never been a big fan of the idea that something offending you...

can set you for life. Kicked off an airplane? Instant millionaire. Work your ass off to feed a family of 5 your entire life? You might have enough for Ramen Noodles in your old age.

[kanrok]

8. Kicked off an airplane, instant millionaire?

Link?

FYI, the woman who was the plaintiff in the Georgia case that went up to the Georgia Supreme Court had severe painful permanent facial scars.

Hardly a frivolous lawsuit.

[gratuitous]

10. You know, the Big Slot Machine o' Justice in every courtroom

If you as a plaintiff can get the defendant into the courtroom, you get a free pull, and if it comes up $$MILLIONS$$, you win! At least, that's how it was explained to me by a bunch of ignorant nitwits who've never read a legal brief in their lives.

[Hosnon]

13. Ha - that would be sweet.

The legal system already has several mechanisms in place to weed out frivolous lawsuits.

Capping damages across the board is short-sighted and unfair. How in the heck do these legislators know what each future case will be worth?

[TexasObserver]

14. That's ridiculous and totally inapplicable.

No one who gets millions in a plaintiff's malpractice suit is "set for life." You're repeating tall tales by the GOP stalwarts. Anyone who gets millions is totally messed up for life, and whatever they get will go to pay their doctors, their lawyers, their experts, their future medical care, and maybe something for the pain, disfigurement or impairment with which they live.

You would never trade places with a med mal plaintiff who gets $5 million at trial. Never. Unless you would enjoy losing use of your legs, or your eyes, or some other horrific bad result from flawed treatment.

Stop repeating tired old GOP lies.

[Heywood J]

15. Much as I think corporations that injure people should be made to

cover their expenses, there are numerous examples where the US tort system turns into jackpot justice - not including the ones who really were mangled, but brought it on themselves. Regardless of whether they have a chance of winning or not, the hope of jackpots spurs many people to file lawsuits they wouldn't have bothered with if a cap had been in place.


http://cjonline.com/stories/051199/new_jackpot.shtml">This is the premier example of the point.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. -- An Alabama jury awarded a jaw-dropping $581 million to a family who said they were overcharged $1,200 for two satellite dishes, providing fresh ammunition for lawmakers who want to reform a legal system they say is out of control.
<...>
It was an Alabama jury a few years ago that awarded $4 million to a doctor who didn't like how the paint had been touched up on his new BMW. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the award, and the doctor eventually got $50,000.
<...>
Once the lawsuit was filed, Whirlpool Financial waived payment of the amount that was disputed by the family, said Robert Spotswood, an attorney for Whirlpool Corp., which has since sold Whirlpool Financial to TransAmerica Bank. The family lost nothing, Spotswood said.

Yet the jury awarded them $975,000 to compensate for their mental anguish and $580 million to punish the company.

http://www.law.com/jsp/law/careercenter/lawArticleCareerCenter.jsp?id=1202431506968

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge on May 28 affirmed an arbitration award of more than $4.1 billion, sending shock waves through the labor and employment bar in California.

The award went to Paul Thomas Chester, a former executive at iFreedom Communications Inc., who brought a wrongful termination suit against his former employer, its affiliated businesses and the founder, Timothy Ringgenberg.

http://madisonrecord.com/news/contentview.asp?c=195202

Madison County Circuit Judge Nicholas Byron awarded Amanda Verett a $311,700 default judgment for injuries she allegedly received while holding a Pizza Hut door open for a Troy police officer.

Verett, a family attorney in Edwardsville, filed suit against Pizza Hut and Clarence Jackson alleging she was injured when walking out the door of Pizza Hut on Feb. 12, when she held open the door to allow herself and Jackson to exit.

She claimed Jackson grabbed the door in such a fashion that it caused the door to suddenly and sharply move and injured her right shoulder.

She claimed Jackson violated his duty to use ordinary care for the safety of others when he operated the Pizza Hut door which caused her to sustain an acromion process impingement in her right shoulder.

[TexasObserver]

16. More propaganda. Jury verdicts are NOT judgments.

I'll address your first one. A case must have support in the evidence for the damages awarded. A jury can write whatever it wants, but unless the damages which were properly introduced into evidence in trial support it, there will not be a judgment for those excess amounts.

I refer you to this source:
http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?d=6558&n=97-068&s=AL%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

Comments: Published reports indicated that Whirlpool Corporation sold its interest in Whirlpool Financial National Bank. Mr. Methvin was also reported to have said that the verdict is unlikely to result in a judgment against the defendants in excess of $1 million. Defendants made no offer of settlement before trial. Mr. Methvin (plaintiffs' attorney) asked for $6.9 million in damages.

That's from the attorney who WON that case.

------------------------------------------------

The jury only makes findings. Those findings are not a judgment. The judge will decide whether the plaintiff gets anything, and if so, how much they get.

While there are occasionally ridiculous jury determinations on damages, those almost never result in a judgment anywhere approaching the number the jury wrote down. The jury has no power whatsoever, except to answer the questions submitted to them by the court. And if they screw that up, the judge can and will order a new trial in the interests of justice.

Even if a judge signs a huge judgment, it will get set aside, reversed and remanded, or reversed and rendered by appellate courts. The process is not so free of constraints as you imagine it to be.

Big jury verdicts get big headlines, but the stories are almost always wrong. They imply that the jury awards the money, but they don't. They make findings, which the court can and will toss out if they are not supported by evidence properly admitted in trial.

[kanrok]

17. Precisely

n/t

[jgraz]

19. +1

[gademocrat7]

5. Music to my ears.

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, napi.

[DemoTex]

7. I heard Chief Justice Carol Hunstein on NPR last week (WABE in Atlanta).

I was very impressed. Hunstein was lamenting the deplorable fiscal state into which the Georgia legislature has thrust the state judiciary. IIRC, she said that the Georgia General Assembly had cut the judiciary's budget to about 5/8 of 1% of the total state budget. The state judiciary cannot meet its constitutional mandates under the current budget, according to Hunstein.

Republicans and Republicanism have run the state of Georgia into the ground. I don't know Chief Justice Hunstein's party affiliation, but she did not sound real happy with the Republican governor (Sonny Perdue) and/or the Republican General Assembly.

Georgia: Another epic GOP FAIL.

[RT Atlanta]

11. Justice Hunstein

She may be an independent, but know that she is certainly well-supported by many Democratic supporters in the state.

Her piece on WABE last week regarding the public defender program offered some good insight too.

RT Rant time:

The problem here in GA is that for all the legislators who like to toute that they "make the tough decisions," no one will call a spade a spade and admit the state needs additional revenue, and that the best way to raise additional revenue is through the obvious - increase taxes.

Instead, the legislators will continue to "cut spending" by cutting back on education and various social programs - all to our state's detriment.

[Indy Lurker]

9. Illinos Supreme Court came to the same conclusion

about 2 months ago.

They basically said it was up to the judicial branch to determine compensation, not the legislature.

[Donnachaidh]

12. YEAH BABY YEAH!!!!!

Hot Damn! A Georgia Judge who rules for the little guy! I'll be picking carpet out of my chin for weeks!

Woo hoo!!!!

[Liberal In Texas]

18. Good, I hope it spreads. n/t