Earlier this month the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected a bid challenging the constitutionality of caps on damages in cases against government bodies. The case, Freilich v. SEPTA, targeted the current $250,000 cap on damages against state agencies. It should be noted that a prior report by the state Legislative Budget and Finance Committee found that more than 99 percent of claims against state and local governments fall within the current caps.
The policy behind sovereign immunity aims to protect the state and its entities from excessive liability and financial burden, thus allowing them to fulfill their governmental functions effectively. If the Supreme Court would have eliminated the caps, it would have opened the flood gates for personal injury lawyers to raid the treasuries of state and local governments, with taxpayers being left holding the bag. All it would take is one nuclear verdict (verdicts of $10 million or more) to wipe out funds set aside for critical government services – such as housing, child welfare programs, fire and police departments, public schools and more. As is often the case, the taxpayers would have born the true burden for the lack of caps via higher taxes and reduced government services.
In an amicus brief PCCJR defended the constitutionality of legislatively imposed caps on damages in cases brought against the Commonwealth and local government throughout the state. PCCJR applauds the court’s ruling, calling it a win for civil justice reform efforts and for taxpayers.