Faulty Cases Must Be Cut Back

At a hearing held by the state affairs committee

, the subject of possible legislative limits on asbestos and silica litigation occurred. A freshman house member, who is also a physician, has written a senate bill. This bill is the darling of business interests who are petitioning the legislature to reduce the number of claims. They say these cases are bogging down the entire system. These business groups note that too many individuals have been taken advantage of by greedy personal injury lawyers and doctors who generously provide X-rays at immediate request. The groups further claim that many businesses spend vast sums of money trying to fend off these fake claims.

There have been some shifts in tort law, which legislate that only one judge in the entire state will hear any new case regarding asbestos. Thus, many personal injury attorneys claim there is no need for any laws limiting cases since this tort will clear this up. Despite these changes, many doubtful claims have still managed to appear on the court dockets, while other attorneys have begun using silica exposure as a basis for the next round of claims.

Companies that have been plagued by these claims have long argued that an easy way to separate valid claims from fraudulent ones would be a requirement that the plaintiffs show actual physical side-effects from the exposure rather than simply displaying an x-ray. The proposed bill would ask claimants to meet rigid medical standards prior to filing. They'd have an x ray, breathing test and doctor's exam.

The new bill would also provide two measures of protection for workers who were exposed but not yet able to prove health damage. First, the bill would wave the usual two year statute of limitations for exposed workers. A worker prevented from opening a claim who experiences severe symptoms would still be able to file a lawsuit regardless of time passed. Next, the bill would keep insurance companies from denying people their coverage, regardless of whether or not their medical tests show that they have been exposed to asbestos.

Such protections are valuable, though some have argued that the medical threshold is too difficult to meet and provides no flexibility. This new proposal would mean keeping the medical standards at their current level, and allowing workers to sue, but also allowing for a judge to refer the claim elsewhere to discuss its validity ahead of time. The goal would be making sure a worker's current rights are maintained, while still being able to separate out the fraudulent, or totally frivolous claims.

One opponent pointed out that if physicians are just lying in order to participate in fraudulent claims, then no bill in the world can fix that problem. The bill will not be able to keep doctors from lying to a higher standard. No matter what either sides motives may be, it's clearly in the state's best interest to remove fraudulent claims from the justice system as quickly as possible. Those workers who really do have good suits should be helped quickly. Although the members of the house proposed this amendment, this will only effect the bill in the house and not the senate as well.

by: Laura Chamorro

POST COMMENT

5 Great Fellowes Personal-use Shredders Know What You're Diving Into The Refrigerator Technician Is Using A Genuine Mechanical Seal Ni-mh Battery Standby Time Longer Than Traditional Nickel-cadmium Battery What do Chickens Really Want? Mens Suits Really Are Fitting For All Activities 20 Minute Payday Bonus Package The lost sole about 20 minutes per day The Best Way To Ride Waves On A Longboard Surfboard Highly Rated Maxoderm Cream - Part Of Your Foreplay Life Changing Decisions Why You Need An Ip Solicitor To Protect Your Intellectual Property