- Articles (12)
- Aviation Accident (2)
- Birth injury (8)
- Bus Accidents (7)
- Car Accidents (196)
- Drunk Driving Accidents (1)
- Firm News (58)
- Medical Malpractice (108)
- Medication Errors (2)
- Personal Injury (107)
- Premises Liability (3)
- Product Liability (24)
- Tort Reform (4)
- Truck Accidents (53)
- Workplace Accidents (11)
- Wrongful Death (41)
Tasked with protecting the public from negligent health professionals, the Tennessee Department of Health releases a ...
When you get a jury duty summons in the mail, your first instinct might be to rip it up, ignore it, or call the court to ...
Kinnard Clayton & Beveridge is pleased to announce that four of our firm’s attorneys (Randall Kinnard, Daniel Clayton, ...
Randy Kinnard has been named the 2020 recipient of the Pursuit of Justice Award. The award, which is given annually by ...
The Impact of Gov Haslam's Tort Reform Bill on Medical Malpractice Cases
Posted By Kinnard, Clayton & Beveridge || Jul 20, 2011
I am speaking today on the Impact of Gov. Haslam's Tort Reform Bill on Medical Malpractice Cases. I am doing this seminar, along with Steve Anderson, for the Nashville Bar Association. We will be discussing the 750,000 caps on damages and the $1,000,000 cap on catastrophic damages. For more information, visit The Impact of Gov Haslam's Tort Reform Bill on Medical Malpractice Cases.
There are several parts of this bill that are disturbing.
First, the bill was passed under the political mantra of "job creation." However, not one expert testified before the committee that a job would be created by passing this law. Next, the sentaors discussed how the caps would give the jury good guidance and we could have more predictability in our jury verdicts. Yet, the caps are kept a secret from the jury. Finally, if a person suffers a spinal cord injury and can no longer walk, then the legislature has acknowledged that person may be catastrohpically injured. However, if a child suffers a severe brain injury from a loss of oxygen, and can no longer walk, talk and is fed through a tube, that injury is not elgible for the catastrophic exception. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?