Med Mal News

Missouri Addresses Insurance Crisis By Resolving to Reduce Errors

In an effort to reduce the number of medical malpractice claims in Missouri, Governor Bob Holden recently created a 17-member Commission on Patient Safety. The committee's job will be to try to devise methods to reduce the number of medical errors made in the state. Some possible areas of interest to the commission are professional training for medical personnel, patient education and changes in hospital protocols. The formation of this group is a continuation of Missouri's attempt to address the malpractice liability insurance crisis. A report from the commission outlining suggestions for legislative and administrative improvements within the state is expected in 2004.

NJ Paper Seeks Access to Med-Mal Settlement Data

A Bergen County, NJ, newspaper, The Record of Hackensack, has sued the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs in an effort to gain access to reports detailing thousands of medical malpractice settlements made since 1989. About 500 settlement reports are submitted each year to the Medical Practitioner Review Panel, a unit of the Division of Consumer Affairs, according to papers filed in the case (North Jersey Media Group v. State of New Jersey, L-5571-03). Disclosure of the information in the reports could prove unpopular with doctors, who have staged several well-publicized short-term strikes in protest against high malpractice insurance premiums. Publication of information about settlements could possibly undermine their stance that the rising cost of malpractice insurance is due to greedy plaintiffs and their equally greedy attorneys, not to bad doctors.

In opposition to the Record's contention that it has a common-law right to view the documents, which would require the judge to balance the merits of confidentiality with the public's 'right to know,' Deputy Attorney General Flanzman has asserted on the state's behalf that because the Record failed to raise the issue of a common-law right when it first applied to the Division of Consumer Affairs, it cannot now raise that argument in court.

Florida Insurer Will Not Renew Certain Policies

In August, the state of Florida imposed caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases in an effort to stop rampant increases in medical practitioners' premium rates and to stem the tide of insurers leaving the state. But, at least in the short term, it may have had the opposite effect.

In the first week of October, Florida's third largest malpractice insurer began sending letters to some policyholders informing them that policies expiring in January 2004 would not be renewed. The insurer, the Medical Protective Co., had earlier in the year applied to the state for a rate increase, but the new law, when passed, froze premiums at the rate charged July 1.

The legislation gives lawmakers until November 14 to devise a new rate scheme, and will require insurers to offer insurance at the rates set or to obtain permission to charge higher premiums. Insurers are also required to give policyholders 60 days' notice of rate increases. Medical Protective's decision to cancel policies that are up for renewal in January was due to the fact that if rates are not set until November 14, it will not have time to petition for and receive permission to charge a higher rate, if necessary, and still give policyholders 60 days' notice of the increase.

Missouri Addresses Insurance Crisis By Resolving to Reduce Errors

In an effort to reduce the number of medical malpractice claims in Missouri, Governor Bob Holden recently created a 17-member Commission on Patient Safety. The committee's job will be to try to devise methods to reduce the number of medical errors made in the state. Some possible areas of interest to the commission are professional training for medical personnel, patient education and changes in hospital protocols. The formation of this group is a continuation of Missouri's attempt to address the malpractice liability insurance crisis. A report from the commission outlining suggestions for legislative and administrative improvements within the state is expected in 2004.

NJ Paper Seeks Access to Med-Mal Settlement Data

A Bergen County, NJ, newspaper, The Record of Hackensack, has sued the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs in an effort to gain access to reports detailing thousands of medical malpractice settlements made since 1989. About 500 settlement reports are submitted each year to the Medical Practitioner Review Panel, a unit of the Division of Consumer Affairs, according to papers filed in the case (North Jersey Media Group v. State of New Jersey, L-5571-03). Disclosure of the information in the reports could prove unpopular with doctors, who have staged several well-publicized short-term strikes in protest against high malpractice insurance premiums. Publication of information about settlements could possibly undermine their stance that the rising cost of malpractice insurance is due to greedy plaintiffs and their equally greedy attorneys, not to bad doctors.

In opposition to the Record's contention that it has a common-law right to view the documents, which would require the judge to balance the merits of confidentiality with the public's 'right to know,' Deputy Attorney General Flanzman has asserted on the state's behalf that because the Record failed to raise the issue of a common-law right when it first applied to the Division of Consumer Affairs, it cannot now raise that argument in court.

Florida Insurer Will Not Renew Certain Policies

In August, the state of Florida imposed caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases in an effort to stop rampant increases in medical practitioners' premium rates and to stem the tide of insurers leaving the state. But, at least in the short term, it may have had the opposite effect.

In the first week of October, Florida's third largest malpractice insurer began sending letters to some policyholders informing them that policies expiring in January 2004 would not be renewed. The insurer, the Medical Protective Co., had earlier in the year applied to the state for a rate increase, but the new law, when passed, froze premiums at the rate charged July 1.

The legislation gives lawmakers until November 14 to devise a new rate scheme, and will require insurers to offer insurance at the rates set or to obtain permission to charge higher premiums. Insurers are also required to give policyholders 60 days' notice of rate increases. Medical Protective's decision to cancel policies that are up for renewal in January was due to the fact that if rates are not set until November 14, it will not have time to petition for and receive permission to charge a higher rate, if necessary, and still give policyholders 60 days' notice of the increase.