Expert witnesses. Can’t live with ’em. Can’t live without ’em. Can’t kill ’em.
Buy me a drink sometime and I will tell you expert witness stories that will make your head spin. Or, let me buy you a drink and I will bore you with the same stories.
But I must confess that I never had an expert I had difficulty reaching because he was in jail. That’s right: jail. Read the opinion.
Did you know that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act has a subrogation provision?
T.C.A. Sec. 29-013-113 requires that a crime victim who receives payments under the Act and later receives damages in a civil action re-pay the State for monies received under the Act. If a civil action is filed the local DA and others must be sent a copy of the complaint and all subsequent pleadings.
Why? Because, unfortunately, part of the job of being a tort lawyer who represents patients and other negligence victims is staying on top of issues that affect current and future clients. I have monitored tort “reform” legislation since 1984. I have testified on our Capitol Hill numerous times since 1985; the first time concerned a bill that severely limited the liability of servers of alcoholic beverages (it passed, we lost).
The fact of the matter is that plaintiff’s lawyers are one of the few voices for malpractice victims. AARP is there. Labor is often there. But there is no “Future Wrongful Death Victims of America Association.” There is no “Prospective Med Mal Victims PAC.” No one ever thinks that they will be a victim of a negligent doctor, a careless truck driver, or a defective product, and therefore even the consumers who care about the issue are often unwilling to speak out about it – they have too many other things going on in their lives that demand attention today.
Therefore, it falls upon lawyers to advocate for victims, not just in the courtroom, but in the halls of the legislature. We have to run for the legislature (only 17 lawyers out of 132 legislators in Tennessee!) or, if we cannot, give monetary support to those who will. We have to find non-lawyers to serve as candidates, help them win, and help them understand that the same people who had the ability to cast the votes that put them into office are the people who serve as jurors. We have to help them understand that when a jury makes an error there is a judge there who can correct the error, and that if that judge makes an error we have an appellate court system to correct it. In summary, we have a system of checks and balances that, all things considered, works pretty dang well.
Public Citizen has just released new information that sets the record straight on various facts concerning medical negligence.
A few highlights:
1. At the same time that insurance rates in some areas have been climbing, the number and total value of malpractice payouts to patients have been flat since 1991 and, in fact, show a significant decline since 2001, when the spike in insurance rates began.
Thanks to Robert Ambrogi for telling us that the ABA Section of Litigation offers a free , weekly e-mail newsletter with litigation tips from James McElhaney.
McElhaney writes a regular article for the ABA publication Litigation (which, by the way, is one of the best litigation oriented magazines out there) and is the author of several books on trial techniques. Order the newsletter by clicking here.
Use this link to access a free version of the Tennessee Code. This site allows ready access to the sections before and after the section you want to review; you can even easily read an entire chapter if you want to do so. Maybe you can do that on Westlaw, but I have never fiqured out how to do so.
That title is so misleading. Today’s hearing has nothing to do with modifying the health care system to prevent injuries and death from medical malpractice.
Today’s hearing will determine whether the Civil Practice Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee will vote-out a bill to restrict the rights of people who have valid claims. We have come to the point in this state and this country where “reforms” restrict the rights of ordinary people and give more power to those who already have it. We call this activity “reform” because “power grab” or “wealth protection action” is too wordy.
I am scheduled to testify today. The good news is that Chairman Rob Briley (D- Nashville) is determined to have a fair hearing on the issues. The Chairman chaired another committee last year that basically determined that all of the hype about the need to restrict the rights of people with meritorious claims was just that – hype.
Well, the Civil Practice Subcommittee met today but the sponser of the two “reform” bills asked that the bills be “rolled” (continued) until next week. The sponser indicated he wanted to amend the bill to address some of the issues I raised in the hearing of 12 days ago. Next Tuesday is the last day this committee will be holding hearings for this legislative session so it will be an all-or-nothing day.
I will be back there next Tuesday to testify. Medical malpractice victims will also be present. AARP will be presenting testimony against the bill and, presumably, so will the TBA. I will let you know what happens. If you want to help email me.
The United States Senate has heard testimony from the DOT Inspector General about the need for stronger deterrents to deter “egregious” hour-of-service violations in the absence of mandatory on-board data recording devices for over-the-road truckers. Tragically, the inspector said that some truckers view the current fines as just a cost of doing business. Read the article about the testimony here.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has withdrawn a proposal to mandate placement of the devices on trucks, but courts have ordered a review of that decision.
There are many trucking companies that act responsibly. However, there are far too many that force drivers to driver over the mandatory limits of hours of service or who permit drivers to do so. After all, many truckers get paid by the mile, which means that if they are not moving they are not getting paid.
Believe it or not, there is an entire website dedicated to educating you on the currrent application of the Daubert decision.
This site includes the original decision, later decisions by the USSC on the subject, cse law by area of expertise, recommendations on tactics, some state law decisions, and more.
What a wonderful contribution to lawyers! Thanks to Peter Nordberg, the man who puts it all together for us.
