There are a number of proposed bills in the current legislative session in Texas that are taking aim at the civil justice system under the banner of "tort reform" -most notably SB 21/HB 2031 and SB 13/HB 274. While most people agree that frivolous lawsuits should not be filed, the more important question with regard to tort reform is, "How bad is this frivolous lawsuit problem in Texas, and what additional laws are necessary to stop this problem?"
If anyone has a grasp on the necessity, or lack thereof, of tort reform laws it would be our elected judges who preside over civil cases in Texas. Below is an article written by Waco attorney Craig Cherry which discusses a recent empirical survey of Texas judges and their views on "runaway juries," "frivolous lawsuits," and "tort reform;" the results of which "tort reform" proponents may find surprising.
If anyone has a grasp on the necessity, or lack thereof, of tort reform laws it would be our elected judges who preside over civil cases in Texas. Below is an article written by Waco attorney Craig Cherry which discusses a recent empirical survey of Texas judges and their views on "runaway juries," "frivolous lawsuits," and "tort reform;" the results of which "tort reform" proponents may find surprising.
Survey of Texas State Court Judges Confirms "Tort Reform" Unnecessary
A new law review article recently published by the Baylor Law Review (Vol 59, Summer 2007) provides empirical data suggesting "tort reform" is unnecessary.
In "Straight From the Horse's Mouth: Judicial Observations of Jury Behavior and The Need for Tort Reform", the authors surveyed state court judges in Texas and found very interesting results, some of which are summarized below.
Regarding actual and exemplary damages, the survey found:
Over 83% of the Texas district court judges had observed not a single instance of a "runaway jury" verdict on either actual or exemplary damages during the preceding 48 months before the survey.
Over 85% of judges had not at all or in only one instance granted relief during the past four years due to an excessive award of actual damages. No judge in the entire sampling had granted such relief during the prior four years in more than three cases.
Over 83% of Texas judges had not witnessed a single jury award too high (compensatory damages).
15% of Texas trial judges observed juries refuse to make any award of punitive damages when the judge believed such an award was warranted by the evidence.
Regarding "frivolous lawsuits", the survey found:
44% of the judges had not personally observed a single frivolous lawsuit in their courtroom during the prior four years.
99% had observed no more than between 1-25% of the cases filed before them as being frivolous.
85% of the responding judges had at most sanctioned a lawyer only one time or less during the prior four years.
Over 86% of the responding judges believed that there was no need for further legislation addressing frivolous lawsuits.
Out of 389 state court judges in Texas, 303 returned the survey to the authors.
The survey results confirm that most Texas trial judges do not see significant numbers of frivolous filings by people who have no business suing, and plaintiffs with legitimate suits are much more likely to be under compensated than to receive any windfall. Two primary goals for tort jurisprudence are for the victim to receive full compensation and to deter the tortfeasor, and when victims are not fully compensated and tortfeasors are not deterred, neither goal is met."
Reprinted with permission.
