Robert E. Cartwright Personal Injury Law Blog on Lawyers.com

As a trial lawyer I am proud to represent those who can not otherwise have access to courts of law throughout this great country. I have heard voices on the political right who try and make the argument that health care costs would be lowered if only there was tort reform in America (Corporate Tort Reform).  

The increased corporate right media machine constantly spews vicious lies about my profession and my sisters and brothers in the plaintiff’s trial bar.  I noticed today that Nancy Pelosi is now under attack for a provision in the House of Representative version of the health care bill.  This provision as stated in conservative outlets like The Drudge Report (Drudge Report), is calling it a “gift to trial lawyers”.  The provision states as follows:  

“Section 2531, entitled "Medical Liability Alternatives," establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]...... a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys' fees or imposes caps on damages. (Emphasis added by Big Government (Big Government Blog).

As I’ve stated in previous blogs (The Truth About MICRA), tort reform groups only look at the harm they believe tort reform will cause me and other trial lawyers, yet and they completely miss the point.  If we start having politicians put their fingers into the wheels of justice, and determine for us who can and who can’t have justice, then the only people who suffer are my clients, the victims of medical malpractice.  

For example, it is now nearly impossible to find a California lawyer in a meritorious malpractice action. (Even in cases where the tort reformers would agree that the doctor’s conduct was bad).  Victims have an extremely tough time finding a lawyer due to California’s Medical Reform Compensation Reform Act (MICRA), which caps pain and suffering for clients at $250,000 regardless of the circumstances.

Has MICRA hurt California trial lawyers? Not a bit, as good malpractice attorneys have simply turned to other practice areas to make a living.  The people that MICRA has hurt are clients who are hurt, maimed and killed by doctors who have made medical error that were below the standard of care in the community.

Take the example of Wayne Volkmuth what he thinks about MICRA after the loss of his 7-year-old son, Ryan, who died three years ago during a dental procedure at a Palo Alto clinic.  As a recent edition of  the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Chronicle MICRA article) pointed out in an article about MICRA, the law has some incredibly horrible consequences including not being able to find a lawyer to take a medical malpractice case no matter how positive the chance of recovery.  

Read the attached SF Chronicle article and ask if tort reform is really helping to keep medical insurance affordable.  After you answer that question, I would suggest that you speak to Mr. and Ms. Volkmuth and find out how they feel about tort reform and whether they’d like to have their child’s back in their loving arms once again.

As I asked back in September: Is your son or daughter’s life worth $250,000?  

So is Nancy Pelosi simply “paying off” trial lawyers, or do she and her colleagues understand that tort reform is nothing but a red herring and an attempt by the insurance industry to limit liability, which will only hurt our clients, the victims of medical malpractice, and not hurt trial lawyers?

Please remember that sometimes there are unintended victims in politics.  The unintended victims here aren’t the lawyers; they are medical consumers who have the misfortune to be hurt by a health care provider.  

I’m proud to represent consumers, and I do it with my head held high.

Rob Cartwright