Pennsylvania’s Litigation Climate Impacts Everyone!
Pennsylvanians can significantly impact Pennsylvania’s litigation climate through the outcome of this year’s legislative elections. This November, the entire state House (203 members) and half of the Senate (25 members) will be on the ballot. These positions carry a tremendous responsibility. Legislators are charged with setting public policy through enacting laws that impact every Pennsylvanian, particularly in the areas of liability and civil justice.
Legislative Elections Directly Impact Your Chance of Getting Sued!
For too long, Pennsylvania’s civil justice climate has been on a downward trend. Judges legislating from the bench coupled with pro-plaintiff legislation have expanded the scope of liability in the state. When state leaders cozy up to plaintiffs’ attorneys, there are serious costs for everyone. It is important that laws are enacted to establish a reasonable litigation climate and reverse the impact of judicial decisions that tilt the scales of justice unfairly in favor of plaintiffs’ attorneys.
The Commonwealth’s consistent ranking as one of the nation’s worst judicial hellholes serves as a red flag to job creators — driving investments and opportunities to other states and increasing costs for taxpayers. The time to right-size Pennsylvania’s civil justice environment is now — we can’t afford to wait any longer. That’s why this upcoming election is so important. We need elected officials that will pursue and support policies to bring balance, fairness and stability to our state’s legal climate. To help educate voters on where the candidates stand on civil justice issues, PCCJR has developed this Voter Guide. This helpful resource provides an overview of the negative impact the Commonwealth’s civil justice system has on taxpayers and job creators, as well as the philosophies of the candidates on the ballot.
Jobs are at Stake
The American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) placed Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court at the top of its rankings of Judicial Hellholes for 2023! The legal climate is a key economic factor in business location and expansion decisions. Being considered a “Judicial Hellhole” is a red flag for job creators, leading to investment in other states and resulting in fewer jobs for Pennsylvanians.
Change Needed!
Venu Shopping Threatens Our Health Care
In 2023, the Supreme Court removed restrictions on venue shopping in medical liability cases. The results were predictable. Suddenly plaintiffs’ attorneys rushed to Philadelphia to file medical malpractice cases. Philadelphia has rewarded plaintiffs’ attorneys richly by issuing a stream of nuclear verdicts. The alarming increase in nuclear verdicts (verdicts over $10 million) is impacting premiums paid by medical providers. Those increased costs are passed on to patients. Eventually, health care availability will be impacted; maternity wards will close, and specialty medical services will be curtailed.
Legislators must pass legislation to return venue shopping restrictions and prevent your doctors from spending more time in Philadelphia on lawsuits and less time taking care of your health.
Private Rights of Action Proliferate
Over the past two years, legislators in Harrisburg have filed an avalanche of bills encouraging wasteful and frivolous litigation. Bills that are otherwise enforceable by District Attorneys, the Attorney General, and government agencies are also allowing attorneys to bring lawsuits. These provisions are unnecessary and only serve to enrich plaintiffs’ attorneys at the expense of employers and job creators.
Fair Share Repair
Appellate courts in PA have eroded the carefully crafted protections contained in the Fair Share Act. Prior to passing the Fair Share Act in 2011, plaintiffs’ attorneys would sue parties just because they had deep pockets, knowing that they could collect 100 percent of a verdict even if the deep-pocketed defendant was only responsible for a small percentage of the harm. The Fair Share Act ended that practice and said that defendants would only pay based on the percentage of their fault, or their fair share. Courts have dramatically rewritten the Fair Share Act and have exempted entire classes of cases from its provisions in direct contradiction to the plain language of the act and the legislature’s intent. The Fair Share Repair Act will correct the damage done to the act by the courts.
Third-Party Litigation Funding
Third-Party Litigation Funding (TPLF) is the practice of investors buying an interest in the outcome of a lawsuit. It has quickly become a multi-billion-dollar industry. TPLF comes in several forms that present distinct issues and require different solutions, but they share three commonalities:
- The funder has a financial interest in the ultimate resolution of the lawsuit.
- The involvement of an outside funder raises ethical issues, such as who is driving or influencing the litigation, directly or indirectly.
- The presence of an outside funder, and its entitlement to a portion of a plaintiff’s recovery, can complicate the ability to fairly resolve disputes and drive-up settlements and awards.
This practice is unregulated in Pennsylvania. At the very least, the existence of a third-party funder in a lawsuit must be disclosed to the parties and the court.
Consent to Jurisdiction
Pennsylvania is the only state in the country that subjects a company to its jurisdiction merely because the company has registered to do business in the Commonwealth. This results in defendants with little to no actual contact with Pennsylvania being sued in our state, and those cases usually end up filed in Philadelphia. Philadelphia is a hotbed of “litigation tourism” due to its reputation for outlandish nuclear verdicts. Pennsylvania’s consent by registration statute must be repealed if we want to achieve a healthy environment in which to conduct business.
What are the Qualities of a Good Legislator?
The Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform (PCCJR) considers several factors when reviewing the positions and qualifications of candidates. Above all, our members want elected officials who will enact laws that are fair, reasonable, and balanced. Job creators and Pennsylvania’s economy are damaged by policies that expand concepts of liability in ways that are unwarranted and lead to unexpected consequences. Laws that recognize the need for consistency in our courts, predictability in legal outcomes, and an understanding that a certain amount of risk is inherent in any human activity will set the right climate for job growth, opportunity, and preservation of medical care. Legislative candidates should support laws that encourage restraint to prevent run-a-way liability costs and bring about the stability needed to protect job opportunities and access to healthcare. We believe candidates who value common sense and personal responsibility will make good policymakers.
Instructions for Finding Individual Votes and Cumulative Voting Records of Legislators:
Click the link below to be taken to PCCJR’s list of important votes impacting liability, damages, jurisdiction, and venue.
You will be taken to a page titled Pennsylvania Legislature Voting Records.
Under Select Session and Chamber, click on the drop box.
To view House votes, you have two lines to choose from as there were many House votes during this legislative session.
Click on 2023-2024 Regular Session Key Votes – PA SH and 2023-2024 Regular Session Key Votes – PA House
The last column on the right on each House page provides the percentage of votes cast in favor of PCCJR positions during the current legislative session. These percentages only reflect the votes reported on each page.
To find a House member’s lifetime score in favor of PCCJR’s positions, click on the name of each legislator in the left column where they are named.
The full Senate did not take any votes tracked by PCCJR during the 2023-2024 legislative session. To find a Senator’s lifetime score with PCCJR, click on 2023-2024 Regular Session Key Votes – PA Senate. Click on the name of the individual Senator to review their lifetime score.