|
Groups
join forces to bar new tort law
It
violates state constitution, suit says
BY
SETH BLOMELEY ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
April 21, 2004
Arkansas Advocates for Nursing Home Residents and others filed a
complaint Tuesday to strike down as unconstitutional the state’s
new tort reform law.
The suit was filed by attorney Morgan "Chip"
Welch of Little Rock.
Also challenging the law in Welch’s suit are the
Arkansas AFL-CIO, the Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association and three
people who contend the law infringes upon their rights as jurors.
Welch filed the suit as an original action in the state
Supreme Court. He’s seeking an order to bar lower courts from
enforcing the tort law. The state’s circuit judges are listed as
defendants.
The law, Act 649 of 2003, limits damages that
plaintiffs can receive in lawsuits.
"Act 649 unfairly punishes victims of corporate
misconduct and medical malpractice, who have already suffered great
pain and suffering," Welch said in a news release.
Ron Russell, president of the Arkansas State Chamber of
Commerce, which took the lead in lobbying for the act, said he wasn’t
surprised trial lawyers would file a challenge.
"I will say [the tort law] will be well
defended," Russell said. "There’s just a lot of greed
going on with the trial lawyers and this [lawsuit] is not about
justice. This is about greed for trial lawyers."
Welch said lawyers aren’t being greedy.
"Nope, this is about the Arkansas
Constitution," Welch said in an interview. "This is about
the rights of citizens and juries. In 1868 the robber barons and the
greedy business owners got the Legislature to take away the right of
jury trials except in limited situations."
He said that prompted the people six years later to
approve Article 5, Section 32 of the state constitution. The article
addresses workers’ compensation and says the Legislature
"shall have the power to enact laws prescribing the amount of
compensation to be paid by employers for injuries to or death of
employees."
The section doesn’t specifically address other kinds
of lawsuits but says, "Provided, that otherwise no law shall be
enacted limiting the amount to be recovered for injuries resulting
in death or for injuries to persons or property."
Welch said that language would make the tort law
unconstitutional.
Russell said he hasn’t seen the lawsuit and,
therefore, could not comment on its merits. He said the chamber’s
lawyers would analyze it.
Gov. Mike Huckabee supported the tort law. Huckabee
spokesman Jim Harris said Huckabee hasn’t seen the lawsuit and so
cannot comment on it.
During the debate in the Legislature, supporters said
Arkansas insurance rates were going up because of lawsuits against
businesses. They said there needed to be limits to create a better
business climate.
But opponents said there were few large-dollar-amount
verdicts in Arkansas and that there was no proof lawsuits were
hurting Arkansas businesses.
Act 649, among other things, limits punitive damages in
civil lawsuits to $250,000 or three times compensatory damages,
whichever is greater, but not to exceed $1 million.
Punitive damages can be awarded only if the plaintiff
receives compensatory damages and proves by "clear and
convincing evidence" that the defendant knew his conduct would
likely injure the plaintiff, but continued the conduct with malice
or an intent to cause injury.
"Clear and convincing evidence" is a more
demanding standard than some others, such as "a preponderance
of" the evidence.
The caps on damages don’t apply if clear and
convincing evidence shows that the defendant intentionally tried to
harm, and "in fact, did harm" the plaintiff.
Act 649 also provides that defendants partly
responsible for damages don’t have to pay the entire judgment if
other defendants fail to pay their share.
The law set stricter evidence requirements in medical
malpractice cases and provides that lawsuits in such cases can be
filed only in the county in which the alleged misconduct occurred.
Information for this article was contributed by Michael Rowett of
the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
|
|