This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Jan 22, 2004
Tort, malpractice bills move to Senate
ROBERT W. DALTON
Staff Writer
COLUMBIA -- State Rep.
Scott Talley said Wednesday afternoon's vote on tort reform and medical
malpractice legislation came down to two choices: Do something or do nothing."I
voted for both bills because something has to be done," Talley, R-Spartanburg,
said after the House passed the South Carolina Economic Development, Citizens
and Small Business Protection Act and the Medical Malpractice and Patient Reform
Act."They are comprehensive bills, and they have their good and bad points,"
Talley said.The tort reform bill places a $2 million cap on all non-economic
damages and requires a jury to separate punitive and compensatory damages.It
also provides for sanctions against an attorney or litigant who brings a lawsuit
that is deemed to be frivolous and prevents "jury shopping" by requiring cases
to be filed where the defendant lives or where an incident occurred.The bill
also gives businesses such as contractors and engineers a window of opportunity
to correct a problem with a commercial property before a lawsuit can be
filed.The medical malpractice bill caps the amount a person can receive for pain
and suffering at $300,000. It does not set a limit for economic damages.The bill
also establishes a procedure that must be followed before a person can file a
lawsuit, and in cases with multiple defendants, it requires juries that award
damages to decide the percentage each defendant will pay.If the providers
singled out by the jury do not pay, the plaintiff can go back to court after one
year to ask that the other defendants be required to pay the uncollected
amount.Talley said he is pleased by the effort to curtail frivolous
lawsuits."They hurt my profession," Talley, a lawyer, said. "I'm in favor of
anything that would put a halt to that."House Speaker Pro Tem Doug Smith,
R-Spartanburg, was the chief architect of the medical malpractice bill. He was
elated to see the bill win approval and move on to the Senate."This takes
doctors out of the courtroom, puts them back with their patients and provides
patients with a better, more effective, more accountable way to address and fix
real problems."Wayne Pressley of Liberty, however,left the Statehouse
disappointed. Pressley was one of about 200 people -- most wearing badges that
read "No tort reform" -- who turned out to show their opposition.Pressley said
he lost about 80 percent of his pancreas in 1996 because of a surgeon's error.
He said he was in and out of hospitals for more than a year, and he now takes
more than 20 pills a day because he has developed diabetes and to help with
digestion.He said he received a $1 million settlement, but after legal fees and
medical expenses, he ended up with about $300,000.Pressley said putting any type
of cap on damages only hurts victims.Talley agreed."To set an arbitrary amount
before a judge and jury get to hear the merits of a case, I completely disagree
with," Talley said. "We trust juries to send people to death. I think we can
trust them to award just compensation."Rep. Ralph Davenport, R-Boiling Springs,
voted in favor of both bills. But he said he was torn when it came time to cast
his ballot."As a small business owner, part of me would like to see caps to rein
in extravagant verdicts," Davenport said. "But another part of me has seen
injured children and adults not receive the compensation they deserved. I want
to protect businesses, but I also want to protect the citizens."Rep. Brenda Lee,
D-Spartanburg, was the only member of the local delegation to vote against the
measures."I don't think this helps the people I represent," Lee said. "When it
comes to people being maimed or losing their lives, I don't think you can
compensate people enough."Robert W. Dalton can be reached at 562-7223 or
bob.dalton@shj.com.