On April 22, 2009, Colorado's House Bill (HB) 1344, a bill that originally would have raised the cap on non-economic damages from $300,000 to about $460,000 in medical malpractice lawsuits, died in the House. HB 1344 was sponsored by the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association, which introduced a similar bill, Senate Bill (SB) 164, in 2008, which was struck down by the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of seven to two on April 29, 2008.
The proponents of both bills argued that raising the caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases was necessary to reflect inflation, particularly when the cap had been first placed in 1988, more than twenty years ago, at $250,000, and raised slightly in 2003, to $300,000. Non-economic damages typically include damages for pain and suffering, loss of companionship, and loss of marital relations.
Unchanged by either bill was the restriction on the total damages for medical malpractice cases, which is set at $1 million. The judge, however, would have the discretion to raise the total award amount.
When SB 164 died in the House Judiciary Committee, Representative Christine Scanlon (D-Dillon) sponsored HB 1344. The House Judiciary Committee approved HB 1344 on Monday, April 20th, but the bill was significantly watered down. Rep. Scanlon removed the language raising the cap on non-economic damages from the bill, because of the strong opposition by medical practitioners, such as the Colorado Medical Society, against the bill.
Opponents of HB 1344 argued raising the damages cap would have raised malpractice insurance rates by seven to ten percent. They argued that after the cap was put in place in 1988, medical malpractice rates fell and have continued to be low.
Proponents of HB 1344 were confident that it would pass, because unlike SB 164, which included a proposal to re-categorize physical impairment and disfigurement as economic damages, and thereby, possibly raise medical malpractice rates, HB 1344 primarily called for a raise on non-economic damages to reflect inflation.
After HB 1344, was stripped of its original language on readjusting medical malpractice caps, the only aspect of the bill that was left consisted of requiring medical malpractice insurers to get prior approval from Colorado's insurance commissioner before raising premiums by more than 5 percent annually. The bill also permitted the state insurance commissioner to publicly post the rate increases, and to hold hearings on proposed premium hikes, if requested to do so by a person acting in good faith.
Once the House Judiciary Committee approved HB 1344, in its revised form, leaving only the language regarding insurance premiums, the House Appropriations Committee approved the bill on April 21st. The bill appeared to be on its way to fully passing, but at the third and final reading on the House floor, it failed by 39 to 24 votes.
The Colorado Medical Society and Colorado Trial Lawyers Association have stated that they are willing to work through their disagreements, and reach some type of compromise regarding the issue of medical malpractice damage caps, but thus far, no solution has been reached. We will continue to keep you updated on any developments regarding this issue.
Thank you for reading this blog. Please be advised that our postings do not constitute legal advice and comments you leave will not be confidential. If you or someone you know has been injured due to medical malpractice, and you need immediate legal assistance, please contact Paulsen & Armitage, LLC for a consultation or information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Medical Malpractice is a highly complex field of law. To be successful in representing victims of malpractice a lawyer must possess not only sound legal knowledge, judgment and experience, but also familiarity with the health care profession and medical science. Before you hire a lawyer, ask for references. You want to talk to people who could comment on the lawyer's skills and trustworthiness. Ask if it is okay to talk to some of the lawyer's representative clients. If privacy concerns prevent the lawyer from sharing the names of their clients, check your local newspaper's archives: you'll probably be able to dig up a few names of clients there. Check out the lawyer's track record. Ask what percentage of their cases are medical malpractice; the higher the better. Visit Medical Negligence for more information.
Post a Comment