Perry Promotes Texas in the Big Apple

Austin American-Statesman
October 26, 2009
Gov. Perry promotes Texas in the Big Apple

By Corrie MacLaggan

Gov. Rick Perry is in New York City today and tomorrow to promote Texas as a business and relocation destination.

Today, the governor spoke at the NASDAQ Closing Bell Ceremony, where he said that Texas is about more than boots, hats and barbecue.

“We all know that the global economy is struggling and our country’s going through one of the toughest economic cycles in our lifetimes, but we’ve come here with a message of optimism, with word that there’s still a place in this country where jobs are welcome, where taxes are low, where regulations are predictable and, you might say also, frivolous lawsuits are a rare occurrence,” Perry said, “and that place is Texas.”

To watch video of that, click here and in the “event profile” section, click on “watch the event video.”

Perry, who is facing a GOP primary battle in March against U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Debra Medina, is being accompanied on the New York trip by Texas Secretary of State Hope
Andrade, Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert and DeSoto Mayor Bobby Waddle. Also with him, according to the governor’s office, are economic development representatives from the cities of
DeSoto, Waco , Lubbock, Pearland, Plano and Temple and representatives from:

American Electric Power

AT&T

Beirne, Maynard and Parsons LLP

Burlington North Santa Fe Railway Co.

Community Development Associates

Locke Lord Bissell and Liddell LLP

Mansfield Economic Development Partnership

Shell Oil Company

Greater Houston Partnership

Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce

Reform affects the cost and quality of health care

Joe Nixon - Special to the Express-News
Does medical liability reform affect the cost and quality of health care? Supporters of President Obama's health agenda allege, not much. CHRISTUS Health, however, might beg to differ.
Founded in 1866 by the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word, CHRISTUS Health now has hospitals, long-term care facilities, and clinics in more than 60 cities throughout Texas (including San Antonio), the south central United States, and Mexico. CHRISTUS Health's mission is to give exemplary health care to the poor and underserved.
In the year prior to the Texas Legislature's 2003 tort reform, CHRISTUS Health spent $153 million in liability defense payments in medical malpractice lawsuits. Last year, its lawsuit-expense payments totaled only $2.3 million. Why the dramatic decrease?
Dr. Tom Royer, CHRISTUS Health's CEO, has stated the savings are due entirely from the tort reform measures enacted by the Legislature. Half of its facilities are in Texas and Texas' lawsuit reform had a dramatic impact.
While $150 million per year is a large number for CHRISTUS, how does that translate to the patient? CHRISTUS has made the conscientious effort to use those savings to substantially increase the charity care it provides and to invest in quality initiatives that further improve the care it provides its patients.
Ten years ago, CHRISTUS Health provided $353 million a year in charity care. By 2008, that number increased to $565 million. CHRISTUS is on pace to spend $700 million on charity care this year — almost 12 percent of its budget.
CHRISTUS Health measures its expenses as a cost per bed. Since the reforms, the cost per bed in CHRISTUS Health's Texas facilities is significantly less than in its facilities in states without the tort reform.
It is also using liability savings to extend its outreach into communities that need charitable primary-care services and in a manner most efficient for both the patient and provider. Recognizing that people often receive their primary care in emergency rooms where it is most expensive and not an emergency, CHRISTUS Health has opened primary-care clinics in poorer neighborhoods.
CHRISTUS Health is one example of a hospital system which, before tort reform, was needlessly spending money defending itself from frivolous claims. Now that money is being spent on its primary mission of providing charitable health care to those most in need.
While the goal of tort reform was to rein in the cost of health care to individuals, the cost to taxpayers for indigent care cannot be discounted. Royer recently assigned $60 million of the liability savings to quality-care initiatives, such as updating and retraining the obstetrical nursing staff in fetal monitoring. The program has greatly improved care for patients. Currently, there is not a single lawsuit against CHRISTUS Health involving an allegation of obstetrical malpractice.
So not only is CHRISTUS Health providing more health care, it is committing new resources to ensure its health care is of the highest, mistake-free quality.
We have been told throughout the federal health care debate that our goals should be increased access, higher quality, and lower costs. The CHRISTUS story illustrates why medical liability reform is an essential element of federal health care reform.
Former Rep. Joe Nixon is a Senior Fellow with the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/Medical_liability_reform_crucial_to_health_care.html

Jury Finds Fraud by Forewoman

Houston Chronicle
October 22, 2009
Commentary: Jury finds fraud by forewoman

By RICK CASEYHOUSTON CHRONICLE

You may remember Cynthia Cortez, the self-appointed jury forewoman in Brownsville who appeared in this column six months ago for bamboozling Ford Motor Co. into settling a lawsuit for $3 million through an act of legal terror.

After a six-week trial, she began the deliberations by asking if anyone else wanted to be foreman. When nobody spoke up, she announced she would do the job.

A few days later, after a weekend off and a Monday on which she phoned claiming a sick child, she sent the judge a note asking, “What is the maximum amount that can be awarded?”

It was punctuated with a smiley face.

Now a second Brownsville jury has thrown the settlement out after hearing a week's worth of testimony. It found that Cortez sent the note “for the purpose of fraudulently inducing Ford to settle with the Castillo family.”

The note panicked the Ford lawyers, who thought the trial went well. After seeing the note, they quickly agreed to plaintiff's lawyer Mark Cantu's demand for the $3 million.

Only after the agreement was filed with the court did District Judge Abel Limas notify the jury that their work was done. As is customary in many courts, the lawyers met with the jurors to discuss the case.

Ford's lawyers were stunned when jurors asked why they had settled. The jurors had quickly determined that the Explorer's roof was not faulty and were nearing a consensus in favor of Ford on the only other issue — whether a design issue caused the Explorer to be unstable.

The jurors agreed they had not authorized Cortez to send her explosive note.

Based on these and further conversations with jurors, Ford refused to honor the settlement. Cantu, a McAllen lawyer who stood to earn nearly $2 million of the $3 million , sued the company for breach of contract.

But Limas (who was defeated for re-election last November) denied the company's request to be allowed to put Cortez (and other jurors) under oath and take her deposition. What's more, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals, on a 2-1 vote, upheld his decision, citing the importance of jury secrecy.

But the Texas Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ford's favor, and they were permitted to take sworn statements from the jurors.

Forewoman Cortez, both in a deposition and on the stand, insisted that she remembered almost nothing about what took place in the jury room. That was part of the evidence that led a jury last week to throw out the settlement.

Jury is questioned

So why would Cortez send the note? The jury was asked that question but does not appear to have given its opinion.

Judge Elia Cornejo Lopez presented the jury with a numbered, five-part question about the note, and one space at the bottom to answer.

The jury answered “yes” to the entire question but put check marks or a “y” by four of the parts, including whether the note was (1) “a material misrepresentation,” and was sent (2) “with the intent that Ford Motor Company rely on the representation.”

But they did not mark the portion that read (3) “sent by or at the direction of plaintiffs or their agents or representatives with the knowledge that it was false.”

Ford's in-house counsel Peter Tassie testified during the trial that the night before the final day of deliberations Cantu told him that if a note came out from the jury indicating they were deliberating on damages, his demand would go up from $1.96 million to $3 million.

“It was strange that he would give a specific figure, rather than just say the amount would go up,” said Jaime Saenz, a Brownsville lawyer for Ford.

Cantu did not return a phone call seeking comment. He and his clients can appeal this jury's decision, seek to retry its original case or drop the matter.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/6681985.html

$2.5 million for being grossed out?

Ridiculous Lawsuit #87: In 2005, 49 year-old part-time paralegal Austin Aitken sued NBC for $2.5 million. He claimed that an episode of “Fear Factor” caused him “suffering, injury, and great pain.” He said that watching the contestants eat liquified rats from a blender on television made him dizzy and light-headed, causing him to vomit and run into a doorway. He told the Associated Press he would have changed the channel, but couldn't get to the remote quickly enough. The judge said the case was frivolous and threw it out.

It's the point of "Fear Factor" to gross out the viewer. Hey, I have an idea. How about suing "Dateline" for being too newsy?

Frequency of Hospital Professional Liability Claims Increasing After Years

Frequency of Hospital Professional Liability Claims Increasing After Years

Frequency of Hospital Professional Liability Claims Increasing After Years of Declines, Says Aon and ASHRM Study

Medical malpractice claims on the rise for 2010
Download image
CHICAGO, Oct. 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- After a decade marked by decreases in Hospital Professional Liability claims, the frequency of claims is on the rise and is expected to continue increasing at a one percent annual rate, according to a study released today by Aon Corporation in conjunction with the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20041215/CGW049LOGO)
The tenth annual Hospital Professional Liability and Physician Liability Benchmark Analysis examines trends in frequency, severity and overall loss costs related to hospital and physician professional liability. More than 100 health care organizations representing over 1,500 facilities ranging from small community hospitals to large multi-state health care systems provided loss and exposure data for the study.
The study attributes the rise in claims to the downturn in the U.S. economy, changes to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rules regarding so called "never-events" or events that should never happen in a hospital and changes in public sympathy toward health care providers.
"Worsening economic conditions in 2008 may have influenced individuals to assert claims against hospital systems," said Erik Johnson, health care practice leader for Aon's Actuarial and Analytics Practice and author of the analysis. "In 2003 through 2007 public attention was directed on tort reform activity and prohibitive medical malpractice costs for physicians. This coincided with significant reductions in professional liability claims. As public attention shifted to other subjects, the momentum of the reductions dissipated. Recently, the public focus has evolved to discussions regarding waste, inefficiency, and defensive medicine. It remains to be seen how this will influence the frequency of professional liability claims."
The Hospital Professional Liability and Physician Liability Benchmark Analysis also found:
In 2010, hospital loss costs per occupied bed equivalent, a major part of the total cost of risk, are expected to increase five percent annually to $3,170.
Claim severity, including both indemnity and defense costs, continues to increase at a consistent rate and is projected to increase by four percent annually.
One out of every four claims and 24 percent of hospital professional liability costs are associated with hospital acquired conditions such as infections and injuries, medication errors, objects left in surgery and pressure ulcers.
In 2010, hospitals can expect to incur liability costs of $181.00 per birth in the Obstetrics Unit and $7.20 per visit in the Emergency Department.
According to Aon's Health Care Industry Report, also released today, the health care industry professional liability market should remain stable for the rest of the year. However, expectations are that market pricing will increase in 2010, in part due to the increase in frequency noted in the Benchmark Analysis.

Who's ready for Halloween!?

Ridiculous Lawsuit: In 2000, Cleanthi Peters sued Universal Studios for $15,000. She claimed to have suffered extreme fear, mental anguish, and emotional distress due to visiting Universal Studios’ Halloween Horror Nights haunted house, which she said was too scary.

Supposedly she was chased by a man with a chainsaw (without the chain). I don't know about you, but I just got the heebie-jeebies. Scaaaaaaary.

Liability reform could save $11B - Austin Business Journal:

Liability reform could save $11B - Austin Business Journal:

Shared via AddThis

Put the Brakes on Ambulance Chasing

Legal Watchdog Launches Campaign to Put the Brakes on Ambulance Chasers
Group Says Illegal Practice Preys on Vulnerable Texans; State Needs Meaningful Penalties

Corpus Christi – Last month Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) groups launched a statewide campaign to educate Texans about the illegal practice of barratry, more commonly known as “ambulance chasing.” The campaign is designed to inform Texans of their rights, to educate them about how to report illegal lawsuit solicitations, and to urge lawmakers to crack down on unscrupulous personal injury lawyers who exploit Texas families.

“Ambulance chasing is flourishing in parts of Texas with some personal injury lawyers and their cronies drumming up business by preying on accident victims – even if no one is to blame,” said Chip Hough, board chairman of Bay Area Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (BACALA). “Ambulance chasing is illegal in Texas for good cause: families have a right to privacy and to be free of harassment especially following an accident or injury.”

Connie Scott, a BACALA board member, added, “Barratry is a felony offense in Texas and those who engage in illegal case solicitation show a horrifying lack of decency. We have reports of a victim who was approached at the funeral home following the death of her daughter. Another victim received his first visit from an unsolicited lawyer while he was heavily medicated at the hospital and virtually blind following an accident. In yet another case, a lawyer is accused of paying a family $25,000 to let his firm file a case on their behalf. These true stories demonstrate why barratry is a crime in Texas.”

BACALA and other CALA groups across Texas are engaging in a television advertising campaign to highlight the problem of aggressive personal injury lawyers who prey on victims and promote junk lawsuits. The ad is accompanied by print and online materials that urge consumers to “put the brakes on ambulance chasing.” To view the ad or online materials, please visit www.bacala.net.

Brazen case solicitation reportedly has become commonplace in some areas of Texas. The San Antonio Express-News recently reported that barratry is “flourishing” in South Texas and that “warfare has broken out over barratry” in Corpus Christi. The paper reported that “lawyers are suing lawyers, seeking to overturn multimillion-dollar settlements of cases they claim were acquired improperly.”

However, according to statistics from the State Bar of Texas, complaints about improper solicitation are rare and seldom result in serious consequences for perpetrators. “Many people don’t know that barratry is illegal and don’t know how to report it,” Hough noted. “Besides, Texas law lacks meaningful penalties for illegal case solicitation, so even those who are reported only get a slap on the wrist.”

Efforts to bolster laws against illegal lawsuit solicitation were quietly defeated during the 2009 legislative session, according to Hough. Initially, House Bill 148 would have allowed clients to collect triple damages from lawyers who engage in illegal case solicitation. The proposal would have penalized lawyers who use “runners” to covertly solicit cases or to otherwise exploit the vulnerability of hospitalized accident victims and their families. Unfortunately, these provisions were stripped from the bill.

“Lawmakers should revisit stronger penalties against these aggressive and illegal solicitations,” Hough said. “In the meantime, Texans should know that current law prohibits lawyers, doctors and other professionals or their representatives from making direct or indirect solicitations of clients, including phone calls and visits. If someone sees barratry in action or falls victim to this practice personally, they should report it to the State Bar Chief Disciplinary Council.”

To report barratry, contact the State Bar of Texas at 1-800-204-2222 x 9.

For more information about BACALA please visit www.bacala.net.