February 7, 2010

Illinois Supreme Court strikes down damages caps

In a case that the attorneys at Levin & Perconti have been keeping an eye on, the Illinois Supreme Court recently struck down our state’s $500,000 cap on awards for pain and suffering in medical malpractice lawsuits against physicians. The Illinois Supreme Court found that the limits set by the Illinois legislature violated the Illinois state constitution’s separation of powers principle. The tort reform ruling involved a medical malpractice case filed on behalf of a child who suffered a birth injury.

Click here to read more about the Illinois Court’s awards cap ruling.

December 30, 2009

Top Ten Civil Justice Triumphs of the Decade

As 2010 approaches, the attorneys at Levin & Perconti wanted to take a moment and wish you and your families a Happy New Year! A recent article in the Huffington Post highlighted the top ten civil justice triumphs of the decade and we think it’s important to reflect on the progress that civil justice attorneys have made. From tort reform failures to product liability victims rights; from Wyeth v. Levine to referendum rejection of special interests; from blogs and books to studies – the past decade has sure been filled of rewards after much hard work in civil justice.


Continue reading "Top Ten Civil Justice Triumphs of the Decade" »

December 11, 2009

Letter to the Editor: Standing up for rights is not frivolous

In a timely letter to the editor at the Chicago Sun Times, the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association President Peter J. Flowers responded to the unreliability and disconnect embraced by anti-consumer groups. Mr. Flowers responded to the December 4 piece by a “tort reform” supporter, Travis Akin, who used a slanted study to conclude that all injury lawsuits filed against Cook County are “frivolous.” The “tort reform” piece mislead readers by using the figure for all legal costs incurred by the county to lead readers to believe that was the amount paid by Cook County in injury lawsuit settlements.

Continue reading "Letter to the Editor: Standing up for rights is not frivolous" »

December 1, 2009

Editorial highlights hypocrisy of corporate America and organized medicine

The Executive Director of the Center for Justice and Democracy has published an on-point editorial on “tort reform.” The article, entitled “Memo to Corporate America and Organized Medicine: No One Likes a Hypocrite,” highlighting the hypocrisy of so-called tort reform.

Continue reading "Editorial highlights hypocrisy of corporate America and organized medicine" »

November 5, 2009

The Chamber of Commerce’s “Tort Reform” Mission

The Huffington Post recently posted an article looking into the often secretive U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its “tort reform” branch, confusingly named as the Institute for Legal Reform. The Institute is attempting to limit citizen’s right to jury trials and right to justice.

To read more about the “tort reform.”

October 14, 2009

The insurance hoax: doctors and patients pay for med mal insurers earnings

The American Association for Justice released a report on medical malpractice insurance. Despite record profits, insurers continue to charge large malpractice premiums. The cost of medical malpractice insurance is one of the reasons behind so-called “tort reform,” but there are obviously other motives. The high costs are going straight to the insurers profits.

To read more about the insurance hoax.

September 2, 2009

Illinois editorial addresses that fairness requires accountability

A recent Illinois editorial, written by Peter Flowers, president of Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, addresses the blame that is often placed on the Illinois court system. The editorial addresses that the attempts to ensure the consumer has rights is the essence of fairness, justice, and equity. The article address how the Illinois court system provides citizens of Illinois with a method of seeking redress from those who have caused them personal injuries.

To read the Illinois editorial.

May 7, 2009

Tort reform videos – soon to be interrupting your movie experience

Next month, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce will release four short clips to run before movies in Washington, D.C.-area movie houses. The movie clips will all tell a story of supposed “Lawsuit Abuse” – injury lawsuits which people were allegedly dragged into the legal system with frivolous lawsuit filings. In a tough economy, it is frustrating that the Chamber is wasting cash on PR stunts when injured victims face real challenges.

To read more about the “tort reform” videos.

February 12, 2009

Court to decide if damages cap applies in products liability lawsuit

An attorney for a lead-paint poisoning victim told a state court that the statutory cap on non-economic damages does not apply to products liability lawsuits brought under the Consumer Protection Act. The attorney is seeking reinstatement of a $2.3 million jury award that was slashed to $515,000 after the caps were applied to the products liability award.

In 2007, an Illinois state court judge ruled caps on damages from personal injury lawsuits unconstitutional.

To read more about the damages cap litigation.

December 26, 2008

AAJ counters tort reform advocates who want lawsuit losers to pay court costs

The American Association for Justice was recently featured in a Wall Street Journal article stressing why it is important that American courts keep the “American rule” for personal injury lawsuits and medical malpractice lawsuits. The so-called tort reform advocates are pushing courts to adopt a system where losers of personal injury lawsuits pay for the court costs, unlike the current system where attorneys’ fees are collected on a contingency fee basis.

For the full article.

August 13, 2008

Personal injury lawsuit filings down in last ten years

Contrary to what a lot of insurance companies and businesses would like you to believe, personal injury lawsuit filings are down over the last ten years. Based on a Judicial Council of California statistical report, motor vehicle lawsuits are way down. This begs the question of whether there are really less injuries or whether injured victims are not being properly compensated.

For the full article.

June 12, 2008

Former Tort Reform Advocate Realizes the Harm from Damage Caps

A former tort reform advocate recently discovered the degree of harm tort reform measures can cause on wronged patients. The advocate, a medical oncologist and an original force behind his state’s tort reform movement, admitted that tort reform has had the unintended consequence of juries denying admittedly wronged patients any recovery. He referred to a case where a pathologist misdiagnosed a woman leading to years of physical, mental, and economic harm to the patient. Following a jury trial, a verdict was returned for the woman, but the jury refused to grant her any damages. The jury’s decision was influenced by a misguided fear created by advocates of tort reform that the physician would leave the state before compensating the injured woman. This case illustrates how tort reform measures have resulted in many patients being forced to pay for physician negligence out of their own pockets, a result not even the most ardent advocates of tort reform would support.

For the full article, click here:

March 20, 2008

Illinois Legislature Strikes Blow for Consumer for Consumer Protection

The Bowling Center Safety Act, an Illinois bill that would have insulated bowling alley owners and operators from liability, failed in committee. The bill provides that bowlers and spectators are deemed to have knowledge of the inherent risks at a bowling alley, and they therefore assume this risk, provided that the operator has not violated his duties under the Act.

The numerous deficiencies of this bill are illustrated by a Levin & Perconti case from 2006, involving a bowler who was injured at a bowling alley because the alley had dimmed its lights, reducing visibility. This was compounded by the design of the alley which had a one step difference between the floor level of the alley and the bowling level. Unfortunately, this step was not clearly marked, and because the lights in the alley were nearly off, the bowler lost his balance and struck his head on the seating area where bowlers sat. The injury resulted in severe spinal damage which ultimately led to the bowler’s death. Ultimately, Levin & Perconti was able to recover a nearly $500,000 settlement which was used by the bowler’s family to pay for many of his medical bills. Passage of the Bowling Center Safety Act would likely have insulated this bowling alley, denying the bowler’s family members the right to recover for injuries caused by the bowling alley’s negligence. This bill’s defeat is a victory for consumers and a blow to companies that fail to provide adequate safety and protection at their business.

Click here for complete bill status:

February 9, 2008

FDA proposes rule holding prescription drug companies less accountable than recent federal law intended

The FDA has proposed a rule in direct contradiction to a law passed by Congress that helps hold negligent drug companies accountable for injuries to consumers caused by prescription drugs. Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) recently which holds drug companies responsible for promptly updating drug labels when they become aware of new safety information. The new rule being proposed by the FDA will relax labeling requirements so that drug companies can use it to claim immunity for failures to warn patients and consumers of drug hazards. This is a form of bureaucratic activism, where unelected agencies like the FDA ignore the will of Congress. If the drug companies are not held accountable for failure to warn, unnecessarily injured consumers will not be able to win compensation from them and the burden will be transmitted to taxpayers.

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES TODAY
and urge them to investigate the FDA's attempt to upsurp Congress's authority to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of their constituents.

January 5, 2008

Annual tort reform report falls flat

The American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) puts out an annual report. In 2007, the American Tort Reform Association's (ATRA) report called "Judicial Hellholes" cost $1.5 million to produce and distribute. However, no more than 10 newspapers referenced the report and those that did pointed out the report's flaws. The report was intended to expose a lawsuit crisis in the United States but in reality, it was just a message paid for by corporations that would benefit from restricting the civil justice process. The New York Times responded by stating:

The question is whether the report's arguments make sense, are supported by evidence and are applied evenhandedly. Here the report often falls short. It is, for starters, a collection of anecdotes based largely on newspaper accounts. It has no apparent methodology.
Other research ventures also identified factual errors in the report. Here stands another example of the influence corporations have on the issue of tort reform because the real, fact-based information supports the maintenance of the civil justice system.

December 14, 2007

Scruggs' Indictment Harmful Even if False

The recent federal indictment of Richard Scruggs is troubling for several reasons. Firstly, if the accusations turn out to be true, the fact that Mr. Scruggs is one of the nation’s most visible and successful trial lawyers will further damage the already existing negative stereotypes. Even if the accusations turn out to be false, the indictment will do nothing to enhance the reputation of trial lawyers. Secondly, the indictment is troubling because the ever-growing belief that large jury verdicts can only happen due to devious tactics and are never deserved will be further entrenched in our culture. This is especially a problem for the injured, neglected, and abused members of our society who are given one chance in front of a jury to correct the harms and losses they suffered. Small jury verdicts based on the belief that large jury verdicts (which are always widely publicized in the media and are always branded as mistakes) are just as devious as large jury verdicts obtained through bribes. Research by trial consultant David Ball and others has shown jurors often argue for lower verdicts as a result of the fear of public distain. What about the injured person or people? Verdict means literally ‘to speak the truth’ and the truth cannot be spoken when bribes or public pressure come into play. Each case must be evaluated on its own merits, even Mr. Scruggs’ case.

For a recent article on the indictment click here.

November 2, 2007

Beware arbitration clauses

Almost all of the contracts that an ordinary consumer is faced with contain a mandatory arbitration clause. Rental car agreements, cell phone contracts, warranties for electronics; they all require that, if there is a dispute between the consumer and the company, the issue will be settled out of court. In theory, these methods of alternative dispute resolution are good for both corporations and consumers, as neither side will be have to be saddled with legal fees and as arbitrations move much faster than court cases. However, a recent California law has provided insight into why this system is not working in practice. In 2002, California passed a law requiring statistics to be kept on cases that were resolved through these mandatory arbitration agreements. An analysis shows that the consumer almost always loses in arbitration, which is probably why only 118 out of 34,000 cases were filed by consumers. In addition, because the winner in arbitrations gets its costs paid by the loser, arbitration is frequently a lose-lose option for the consumer. As a result, there has been recent efforts in the Senate to make most mandatory arbitration clauses unenforceable.

Click here for the full article.

October 30, 2007

Lawyers, victims of negligence and wrongful death speak out against Tribune Editorial

In response to the editorial published by the Chicago Tribune last week, lawyers, advocates, clients and victims of negligence and wrongful death have spoken out. Click here to read the responses to the editorial.

October 28, 2007

Trial Lawyers: the last line of defense

In response to a recent editorial that appeared in the Chicago Tribune, consumers, advocates and those wronged by the conduct of others have spoken out. Last week, the Tribune published an article bashing trial lawyers. It is no surprise that the bashing came from a special interest group that protects insurance companies and big business.

The agenda of this group is not to protect consumers but to limit access to justice by citizens in Illinois who have been wronged by defective products, medical malpractice and catastrophic accidents. In reality, the civil justice system is the only way that injured people and families who have lost loved ones can hold wrongdoers accountable for negligence.

Consider the outraged response from a woman whose sister was killed in a workplace accident, leaving a child without a mother. Or the response of a consumer group dedicated to protecting citizens from the negligence of product manufacturers, big business and greedy insurance companies. Clearly, many of the citizens of Illinois realize that trial lawyers and personal injury lawsuits are often the last line of defense for those wrongfully injured or killed and their families.

August 1, 2007

Levin & Perconti sponsors American Constitution Society’s national convention

This weekend, the American Constitution Society, ACS, held it’s national convention in Washington, D.C. The American Constitution Society is one of the nation’s leading progressive legal organizations composed of lawyers, law students, judges, policymakers and other concerned individuals.

Levin & Perconti was a law firm sponsor of this event.

For more information about ACS and to view the video taped panel discussions from the conference, click here.