Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Mississippi Adopts 'Tort Reform'

By Bradley W. Smith and Habib Nasrullah
April 01, 2003

Tort reform continues to be a controversial topic. California has placed a cap on damages. At press time, New York was considering similar legislation. Doctors in several states have conducted “strikes” to protest the amount of their malpractice premiums and to urge tort reform in their states. This article describes recent legislation in Mississippi ' in order to alert readers to the trend and illustrate one state's efforts to deal with the problem of astronomic verdicts by sympathetic juries.

Months after the American Tort Reform Association declared Mississippi's 22nd Judicial District one of the “judicial hellholes” of the nation, the Special Session of the Mississippi Legislature that began on September 5, 2002, and ended on November 26, 2002, passed tort reform legislation impacting product liability litigants.

Over the last few years, Mississippi has been home to several enormous verdicts, including those for punitive damages, in state court product liability cases. For example, in Johnson v. AC&S Mfg., a jury awarded the six plaintiffs $150 million in actual damages in an asbestos product liability case. In Rankin v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, the jury awarded ten plaintiffs $100 million in actual damages relating to use of the drug Propulsid. Finally, a jury awarded two plaintiffs $25 million in actual damages and $120 million in punitive damages in Robinson v. Ford, an automobile product liability case. The volume of litigation and high verdicts led the American Chamber of Commerce to name Mississippi one of the worst states in the nation in which to do business. While the reforms prompted the president of the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association to declare, “[I]t's a bad day for Mississippi,” the reality is that the Legislature predictably compromised several issues of importance to segments of the business community. At a minimum, however, the new laws collectively represent a giant step in the right direction, particularly for product liability defendants. The significant provisions include the following:

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.