Removing Caps for Noneconomic Damages: The Kansas Experiment

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ike Brannon
Keyword(s):  
Noneconomic Damages

686: Primary cesarean delivery in the U.S.: the impact of noneconomic damages caps

2011 ◽  
Vol 204 (1) ◽  
pp. S270-S271
Author(s):  
Yvonne W. Cheng ◽  
Jean-Marie Guise ◽  
Sanae Nakagawa ◽  
Aaron B. Caughey
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Delivery ◽  
Primary Cesarean Delivery ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Noneconomic Damages ◽  
The U.S

Medical Malpractice Litigation

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Hyman ◽  
Charles Silver
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Healthcare Spending ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Real Problem ◽  
Damage Costs ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Civil Justice System ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Noneconomic Damages

Medical malpractice is the best studied aspect of the civil justice system. But the subject is complicated, and there are heated disputes about basic facts. For example, are premium spikes driven by factors that are internal (i.e., number of claims, payout per claim, and damage costs) or external to the system? How large (or small) is the impact of a damages cap? Do caps have a bigger impact on the number of cases that are brought or the payment in the cases that remain? Do blockbuster verdicts cause defendants to settle cases for more than they are worth? Do caps attract physicians? Do caps reduce healthcare spending—and by how much? How much does it cost to resolve the high percentage of cases in which no damages are recovered? What is the comparative impact of a cap on noneconomic damages versus a cap on total damages? Other disputes involve normative questions. Is there too much med mal litigation or not enough? Are damage caps fair? Is the real problem bad doctors or predatory lawyers—or some combination of both? This article summarizes the empirical research on the performance of the med mal system, and highlights some areas for future research.

Are Medical Malpractice Damages Caps Constitutional? An Overview of State Litigation

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carly N. Kelly ◽  
Michelle M. Mello
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Bush Administration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Intervention ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Financial Recovery ◽  
Noneconomic Damages

The United States is in its fifth year of what is now widely referred to as “the new medical malpractice crisis.” Although some professional liability insurers have begun to report improvements in their overall financial margins, there are few signs that the trend toward higher costs is reversing itself - particularly for doctors and hospitals. In 2003-2004, the presidential election and tort reform proposals in Congress brought heightened public attention to the need for some type of policy intervention to ease the effects of the crisis.The darling of tort reformers at both the federal and state levels has been legislation to limit, or “cap,” damages awarded to plaintiffs in malpractice cases. Health care provider groups, liability insurers, and the Bush Administration have all seized on the example of California's MICRA law, which since 1975 has capped noneconomic damages in malpractice cases at a flat $250,000, as the path to financial recovery.

AAFP Starts Push for Hard Cap On Noneconomic Damages

2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (21) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
MARY ELLEN SCHNEIDER
Keyword(s):  
Noneconomic Damages
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document