ProAssurance, a nationwide medical malpractice insurer with 57,000 insureds that is based in Birmingham, has a growing presence in Tennessee. It has done very well the last few years.
In 2005 it had pre-tax income of $109M, about 17% of revenues. In 2009 pre-tax income was $319M, about 52% of revenues. Not bad. Not bad at all. Read more here.
The return on equity in 2009 was 14.2%, and shareholder book value has grown by 278% in the last ten years.
As mentioned in the last four posts (here, here, here and here), the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts has released the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Judiciary. The Report Contains statistical data about our court system.
Today we look at damage awards in several counties in the state. There are some obvious problems with the data we are about to share. First, we cannot tell from the Report whether the damage awards were in jury cases or non-jury cases.
Second, we cannot tell if the plaintiff won the case or lost the case from the mere fact that damages were awarded – there may have been a settlement offer in excess in the amount awarded by the fact-finder.
As mentioned in the last three posts (here, here and here), the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts has released the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Judiciary. The Report Contains statistical data about our court system.
As mentioned in our earlier posts, there were 263 jury trials and 325 non-jury trials in tort cases in Tennessee last year. The Report tells us which the number of jury and non-jury trials in each county and the number of cases in which damages were awarded in each county. Unfortunately, the Report does not tell us whether the damage awards were in jury or non-jury trials.
Here is some data from the larger counties:
As mentioned in the last two posts (here and here), the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts has released the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Judiciary. The Report Contains statistical data about our court system.
Today we look at additional information about tort cases that were filed or tried in state court in Tennessee. "Tort cases" includes medical malpractice cases.
Of the 229 cases that were tried that resulted in damage awards for the plaintiff, the total damages awarded were $91,682,216. This is an increase of a little over $8,000,000 from a year earlier. The average award, then, was $400,359.
As mentioned yesterday, the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts has released the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Judiciary. The Report Contains statistical data about our court system.
Today we look at information about tort cases that were filed or tried in state court in Tennessee. "Tort cases" includes medical malpractice cases.
There were 10,469 tort cases filed in Tennessee in the year ending June 30, 2010. This is down about 6% from two years earlier – in the year ended June 30, 2008, there were 11,171 filings.
The Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts has released the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary. Over the next few days I will share some data from the Report.
We begin with medical malpractice cases. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, 429 medical malpractice cases were resolved by judgment, settlement or dismissal. Only 324 new cases were filed.
There were only 30 medical malpractice cases actually tried in state court in Tennessee during the fiscal year. The total awards for the patient in those cases were $7,128,800. Unfortunately, the Report does not indicate the number of cases won by the patient or by the health care provider. Historically, that number is about 20% of all trials.
That tweet might just get you sued. Courtney Love allegedly fired off a negative tweet about a fashion designer, and now the defamation case against Love is going to trial.
Read more about it at this post from the Connecticut Business Litigation Blog.
This is one of the best articles I have read in a long time, coming from a man who I have cited often but never met: Max Kennerly.
A short sample:
At these pre-trial events [hearings, pretrial conferences, etc.], the only thing stopping a lawyer from looking the judge in the eye and telling him or her an outright lie is that oath the lawyer made to the government years ago.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that the 30-day period for removing a case to federal court does not begin to run until "the plaintiff serves the defendant with a paper that explicitly identified the amount of damages sought."
Moltner sued Starbucks in state court in New York but did not state the amount of damages he sought. Moltner’s lawyer later sent a three million dollar demand letter to Starbucks. Starbucks filed a petition to remove the case to federal court more than 30 days after it received the complaint but less than 30 days after receiving the $3 million demand. The Second Circuit permitted the removal, rejecting the argument that Starbucks should have deduced from reading the complaint that the case sought damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount of the federal courts.
Here is the opinion in Moltner v. Starbucks Coffee Company, No. 09-4943 (2nd Cir. Nov. 2, 2010).
Oral arguments were heard two months ago in Williamson v. Mazda Motors of America, and when the United States Supreme Court decides the case we will have a better understanding of the law of preemption.
At issue is whether a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rule permitting the use of Type1 seat belts (lap belt only) in the middle seat of passenger vehicles preempts a claim by an injured passenger that the manufacturer should have installed a Type 2 belt (includes a shoulder harness) in the vehicle.
The California Court of Appeals held that the claim was preempted. The California Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case on November 3.
