For years, the Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform (PCCJR) has warned that expanding liability and increasing jury awards make Pennsylvania less affordable. A major academic study by researchers from Georgia State University and Brighthouse Financial provides new evidence that social inflation—the rising cost of litigation beyond normal inflation—is real and measurable.
The researchers analyzed more than 74,000 jury verdicts and settlements from 2009 through 2024. They found that plaintiffs are winning more often, fewer cases are settling, and jury awards are growing significantly. The study also found greater social inflation in states without caps on damages and without regulation of third-party litigation funding.
These rising litigation costs do not disappear. They are reflected in higher insurance premiums, health care costs, and prices for goods and services. Lawsuit expansion makes Pennsylvania less affordable.
The findings also reinforce concerns about House Bill 1913, which would allow attorneys to suggest specific dollar amounts for pain and suffering during closing arguments—a practice known as “anchoring.” Research shows that large suggested figures can influence jurors’ assessments of damages. At a time when jury awards are already increasing, policies that encourage even larger awards risk adding to those costs.
Although the study examined national data, its findings are directly relevant as Pennsylvania considers issues including venue, third-party litigation funding, and HB 1913. The research reinforces a basic principle: a fair and balanced civil justice system matters because Pennsylvania families, patients, employers, and consumers ultimately bear the cost of lawsuit and liability expansion.
The academic study can be viewed here.