By Darwyyn Deyo | PA Independent
HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania House voted 112-88 Monday to repeal the ability of juries to order one defendant to pay the total award, even when there are multiple defendants.
Under the law now, even when there are multiple defendants in a case, if only one can afford to pay the jury award, they can be ordered to do so by the courts. This occurs even when the defendant — a corporation or insurance company — has not been found to carry the largest proportion of the fault.
Arguing for the bill Monday, state Rep. Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, described the House Democrats’ points as “disingenuous” and said without legal reform in Pennsylvania, new businesses and jobs will not come to the state.
“Employers do not locate here, nor do they stay here,” Turzai said. “Pennsylvania, unlike other states has not undertaken a reform that is being put here today. Small businesses, large businesses (have) asked us to look at the damage perspective.”
Turzai compared the liability businesses face in Pennsylvania to New York and New Jersey, both of which have moved away from the joint and several liability rule.
An instance of joint and several liability could be a case where a man is injured by a poorly manufactured product, but it ends up being the company that sold the product — not the manufacturer — that has to pay the full damages.
State Rep. Ron Marsico, R-Dauphin, argued that without the passage of the bill, the state government would be subjected to “hundreds” of lawsuits, paid for by taxpayers.
“The issue is much bigger than victims versus business,” said Marsico. “The cost of the current system inflicts great harm on many victims. Those victims are the entire population of this commonwealth. The current system which encourages to search deep pockets … encourages lawsuits against the commonwealth, local governments, civil organizations, churches and community groups.”
Gov. Tom Corbett has endorsed the bill, as has the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said Kevin Shivers, state director for Pennsylvania.
“Plaintiffs lawyers use (the current law) to catch as many defendants in a lawsuit as possible, as they seek out the defendant with the deepest pocket,” Shivers said . “The current law forces many companies to settle a claim whether they’re right or wrong rather than risk going to trial and potentially losing a lottery sized jury award.”
Shivers said the average cost of defending against a lawsuit is $100,000, and he pointed to the risk of a business paying for 100 percent of the damages even if they are only 1 percent at fault.
The latter statistic was hotly contested on the House floor, and Mark Phenicie, legislative counsel for the Pennsylvania Justice Association, an organization of trial lawyers, said only three cases with 1 percent fault have occurred across the United States, and none of them occurred in Pennsylvania.
“Most jurors and average people would not consider 1 percent to be just cause,” said Phenicie. “It’s fabrication of what goes on. To even get into that pot the jury has to determine you play a substantial factor.”
Phenicie argued if H.B. 1 passes both the House and the Senate, victims will end up on public welfare as they will not be able to pay for the damages they suffered.
“The plaintiff has to go on public relief, his life’s screwed up,” said Phenicie, referencing an example where three companies were at fault but only one could pay. The case was discussed at last week’s hearing on the bill.
“The other two did not have money,” he said. “One was bankrupt and the other basically had nothing. To guarantee this poor victim would get compensated … there was only one company with the ability to pay.”
