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The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has withdrawn a proposal to mandate placement of the devices on trucks, but courts have ordered a review of that decision.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.

I have been invited to speak at the Murfreesboro American Inns of Court meeting on April 28, 2005. The speech will address recent developments in tort and comparative fault law.

The meeting is at the Stones River Country Club in Murfreesboro. The social hour begins at 5:30, dinner is at 6:30, and the speech will begin at 7:00 or so.

I will post my handout materials after the speech.

The American Association of Critical Care Nurses has issued a new study concerning medical malpractice in our nation’s hospitals.

This is scary stuff. The reports says that each year “one in twenty in-patients will be given the wrong medication, 3.5 million will get an infection from someone who did not wash his or her hands or take appropriate precautions, and 195,000 will die because of mistakes made while they’re in the hospital.” The study goes on to say that 60% of medication errors are caused by mistakes in interpersonal communication.

The study explains that the majority of health care providers break rules, make mistakes, or apppear to behave incompetently, but less than 1 in 10 say anything about it.

A survey of federal judges concludes that there is not a problem with frivilous litigation in their courts.

Seventy percent of the the judges surveyed said the frivilous litigation was a “small problem” or a “very small problem.” Only one percent of the judges said it was a “very large problem.”

Thanks to Evan for informing me about this report.

Contact Information