Posted on 03/23/2011 2:15:02 AM PDT by lowbridge
As a general rule, New York Times editorials have an inverse relation ship to reality. The harder they bang on an issue, the more you can be certain they are wrong.
So it is with Gov. Cuomo's plan to limit "pain and suffering" awards to $250,000 in medical-malpractice cases. The Times accuses Cuomo and hospitals of bad faith, and claims the plan will "punish patients badly injured by medical negligence." It demands a "debate . . . that includes legal experts and patients' advocates."
Oh, yes, the "legal experts," especially those who double as members of the Legislature. Perhaps that well-known "patient advocate," Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver, of Weitz & Luxenberg employ, could join the debate.
Or maybe Republican state Sen. John DeFrancisco of Syracuse could weigh in. He is against caps on awards and lawyers' fees and just happens to be "of counsel" to a tort firm where his son is a partner.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Put a cap on Medical Mal Practice and then you end up putting a cap on Auto injury claims too. What are they trying to do put the trial lawyers on food stamps? It ain’t going to happen.
Just limit attorney fees to 5% Intead of one third of the award. And frivolous lawsuits will result in disbarrment.
That solves 90% of the problem.
bump
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.