Posted on 06/24/2002 10:23:06 AM PDT by SLB
CBN.com — JACKSON, Mississippi — Sometimes when bad things happen, someone is to blame. So, sometimes people sue. But when too many people sue for higher and higher amounts of money, more bad things start to happen. Businesses take up shop and move away, putting people out of work. And doctors leave, putting people in danger. That is what's happening in at least 12 states, including Mississippi.
If you are pregnant and live in Mississippi, don't count on being able to find a doctor to deliver your baby. And if you are in a serious car accident, you might have to be flown to another state for emergency treatment.
Mississippi is in the midst of a serious medical malpractice crisis. Many of its doctors simply can not afford to practice medicine in the state anymore, or they can't get insurance, and they are leaving.
In fact, the situation is so bad in the city of Natchez that two thirds of the doctors say they are ready to take their practices across the river and start over in Louisiana.
"We're losing doctors, we're bleeding doctors, and we can't get anybody to come back in," said Dr. Mal Morgan, former president of the Mississippi State Medical Association.
"We cannot recruit new physicians. When we say something about coming to Mississippi to practice medicine, they laugh. That's the end of the interview. It's over," Morgan said. "If everything you've worked for for the last 20 years can be wiped out in three months in a Mississippi courtroom, including everything you own, everything your family has, I could see how they would say it's just not worth it."
Ninety percent of obstetricians who have practiced at least 10 years in Mississippi have been sued. Insurance premiums for doctors can cost more than $100,000 per year. It has gotten so bad for business in general that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce launched an ad campaign to warn businesses from locating in Mississippi.
Democratic Governor Ronnie Musgrove slammed the Chamber for what he called "political blackmail," but Mississippi's liability system is ranked dead last by corporate America, and companies are voting with their feet.
The state saw 73 plant closings last year and lost 27,000 manufacturing jobs. And still, tort reform went nowhere in the state legislative session. Perhaps that is not surprising, considering most of the state's key leaders, including Governor Musgrove, are trial lawyers.
"When you look at the three branches of government in the state of Mississippi, I would generally say they are controlled, right now, by a small group of personal injury - very rich - trial lawyers who have put the fear of the next election at stake before everyone who wants to get reelected in the state of Mississippi," said Ron Aldridge, head of the state chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, which is working with other business groups to reform the system.
"One lawsuit can wipe out a small business," Aldridge said. "The typical small business in Mississippi is having to go uninsured. They can't afford the continuous high cost."
Since 1995, the state has seen 20 awards of at least $9 million and seven awards of more than $100 million, although most of those awards were reduced on appeal. Most companies will settle out of court for fear of a multi-million dollar verdict. And counsel may get as much as half the settlement, making the magnolia state the equivalent of Disney World for trial lawyers.
Ads blanket the TV and newspapers, offering to sue over everything from bad drug side effects to bad stucco. And evidence doesn't always matter. Dr. Morgan says, in one lawsuit involving the heart drug Propulsid, he was asked by the defense to look at the electrocardiograms of the victims.
"And in none of them could we find any evidence in all the charts of any serious heart arrhythmia," Morgan said. "So none of them had any bad result from the medication. All of them had normal electrocardiograms, yet they won $5 million [each]."
But not everyone thinks Mississippi's legal system has a problem. "Our civil justice system in this state has proven quite fair to corporate defendants," said Shane Langston, president of the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association.
Langston says someone has to stand up for the little guy. "The medical community, their insurance carrier, the business community, they have hundreds of millions of dollars in assets and resources. The clients that we represent, the catastrophically injured, the families of those who have been killed through defective products or medical malpractice, they don't have the money, the clout, that these corporate defendants have, and these medical providers have. Their voice is through the trial lawyers, otherwise, they don't even have an access to the courthouse," he said.
Leroy Walker is a local businessman, and he does not think of himself as a corporate high roller. He was a schoolteacher before risking his pension on a single McDonald's franchise. Now he owns 16, but could be wiped out by a huge lawsuit.
"Well, clearly one suit could definitely bankrupt a corporation, a business," Walker said. "And one of the things that is interesting to me is, take my business for example. We've got a thousand and eight employees. What impact does that have on those other individuals who are working in the organization? Clearly you're going to have to make cuts."
Walker has already been sued for $38 million, just because someone was shot on his property. "We want to do better for our communities, uplift our communities. These particular lawyers are just taking advantage and raping the little guy, from our vantage point, and taking advantage of the system," he said.
Langston says Mississippi's medical malpractice crisis is hype, that what has really hurt insurers are bad investments on the stock market, and that medical insurers win most cases.
"They brag that they win almost 80 percent of the jury trials in Mississippi. Doctors are the most protected profession in our state and they win most of the time," he said. "It's not a problem with Mississippi's civil justice system, and to stack the deck further in favor of the doctors is not fair to those citizens who need our civil justice system the most. They have to have access to the courthouse and have to have an even playing field."
But Aldridge says there is nothing altruistic about the motives of the trial lawyers. "He's standing up for the little guy as long as there's a huge wad of money that could go into his back pocket," he said. "The law used to be about right and wrong. Now it's about winning and losing."
And in the end, somebody has to pay the bill. It looks like it is going to be Mississippians - those who need a doctor, or a job.
The American Medical Association says Mississippi is one of 12 states with medical liability crises. Other states on the list include: Florida, Georgia, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington and West Virginia.
Everyone I know there who is self employed lives in fear of lawsuits. The huge tobbaco setlements really bankrolled the war chest to just keep on extorting from folks with a steady stream of plantiffs.
I went to school with folks who became "starving lawyers" and after tobacco hit they reaped 8 figure windfalls.
A friend of mine whose family owns a chain of dry cleaners has been sued more than once by robbery victim employees even when it was later proven that some of the employees were in on the robbery.
In Jackson, home invasions are now called "armed trespassing" to skew the statistics. One can only assume that they will eventually follow South Africa's example and outlaw violent crime statistics because it's bad for business.
Shame...the parasitic trial lawyers have found a plentiful food source but they may run the well dry.
The misconceptions of PI work are amazing. (Even a year after I graduated law school I sneered at the idea of doing PI work.) Everyone who bitches about what PI attorneys make should watch the movie a Civil Action or better yet read the book. Schlictmann walked away from the case bankrupt. He put his own money at risk to provide access to the courthouse for people who wouldn't normally be able to seek justice. You put your own money and reputation at risk and the reward should be commiserate with that. Most of the people who bitch about PI fees are the same one who excuse Corporate CEOs who jump w/ a golden parachute and the stockholders are broke.
What people don't understand is that XYZ Insurance Co. is going to be in business tomorrow, regardless of whether it pays the plaintiff $75,000 or $500,000. The plaintiff, however, may never work again and $75k may mean that he has to go live under a bridge.
BTW, for those of you who will question my conservatism b/c of my occupation, please note that I voted for Bush, Bush, Dole and Bush.
I wonder why that is. The PI lawyers are obviously victims of a misinformation campaign directed by some richer, more malicious group.
Either that, or their work is so close to Mother Teresa's in nature that the unsanctified masses can't understand the nuances.
Try the insurance companies.
Either that, or their work is so close to Mother Teresa's in nature that the unsanctified masses can't understand the nuances.
I don't exactly file a lawsuit and then take home $100,000 the next day. It's usually 2 to 3 years worth of work. All the while, my time and money is tied up in a case and there's a chance (although in LA and MS, it is is a small one) that I go home with zero.
I swear to God, conservatives rationality goes out the window when it comes to PI work. Apparently, everyone in every other occupation is allowed to make as much money as they want, except us. I didn't know Adam Smith had a chapter on Marxism when it comes to a contingency fee.
Most conservative tort lawyers (the very few!!) are willing to agree to a "Looser Pays" concept.
Under the current scheme, the dishonest lawyers (numbers are legion!) are willing to sue for anything, throwing "$h!t" on the wall hoping something sticks, and the person or company being sued will settle out of court. If they had risks, then maybe they would be a bit "discriminating" about which suits they would be willing to take.
Blaming insurance companies is a bit unfair! They exist to make a profit for the investor, by pooling/sharing risks. But those risks are hard to assess (and then it is hard to collect the high premiums to cover the payouts (when awarded), and costs of litigation to avoid payouts) - if states have ridiculous policies towards tort cases.
But I am sure that if there are many lawyers that believe the insurance companies are gouging the customers ... then let them start up their own company, make a fair profit while offering reasonable insurace at lower rates. (I bet you none of the PI lawyers are willing to do this!! How about a law requiring 50% of all PI payouts to lawyers be invested in an Insurance Company that offers insurance to corporations, Doctors, etc. If the tort laws are fair, then the lawyers will see the investment grow, and they will benefit! If the tort laws are unfair, then their "investment" will be wiped out.)
Mike
I admire your candor and bravery and wish you the best. I trust you are responsible.
But, I fail to see how Adam Smith's views on capital, and employees and goods produced for markets relates to lawyers suing for damages or even worse class action suits. One produces products for society and employs folks and the other is merely recompense which benefits no one besides yourself and your client...as well as your staff I suppose. Do you really think Dick Scruggs is what Smith had in my mind?
Tort law goes back to the Wealth of Nations. In fact they go hand in hand. In your example, you assume the positive. Company X produces widgets, people pay company X for the widget b/c it makes their lives easier. What if Company X produces a widget and people pay for it and then 10 people die because of the widget?
Now you say, the market will force Company X out of business because no one will buy their product. What if Company X says our products didn't cause the death of those 10 people and continues to produce the product?
Where is the market force that corrects this? Furthermore, where is the market force that makes the victims whole again? Would you like it if the Federal Government just came in and said Company X pays us $1,000,000 for the havoc you wrecked in the marketplace, we'll pay the families of the victims, and decide what their lives are worth? No you wouldn't. Company X and the victims families do not have equal bargaining power. I provide a private sector check on the market w/o the need for government regulation. I help equalize the bargaining power of the victim's family. Maybe Dick Suggs has taken this too far but trust me for all the complaining done, there isn't anyone in this country who want to live here w/o PI lawyers.
I simply refused to participate in the hand gun lawsuit or the tobacco case. The hand gun lawsuit had no basis in law whatsoever and quite correctly, it was bounced (i think) in every jurisdiction in which it was filed.
Tobacco was won on PR, not law, with the Federal Government's help. Do I have to remind you all that the original settlement was quite less than what was later agreed upon b/c the 'Toon wanted a piece of it? Furthermore, even the later settlement was favorable to big tobacco b/c they knew what their litigation costs were going to be for the next twenty years.
Looks like quite a few babies will be born in the ER pretty soon. If a mother get a bad result (a nice fat juicy CB case) because she had no prenatal care due to the unavailability of doctors, who does she get to sue?
Who caused this injury? Looks to me like the lawyers did...
She can sue the ER, if she makes it there. But there's no law saying a hospital has to maintain an ER, surprisingly enough. ERs are money losers, bigtime. As odd as it may be, hospitals maintain ERs out of a sense of mission to their communities. I've often wondered why they don't just shut them down...
A great way to serve "the little guy", I suppose, is to prevent malpractice altogether by preventing medical practice in the first place. No doctors, no malpractice. What a favor to mankind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.