W.Va. Needs To Change This

Are lawmakers for gouging business or pushing economic development?

Charleston Daily Mail, March 25, 2005

Gov. Joe Manchin proposed that the state ban bad-faith lawsuits against insurance companies, a move he said could cut West Virginians' car insurance bills.

Despite a lot of squawking by trial lawyers, the state Senate handily passed that bill, as well as another tort reform measure, clearing the way for consideration in the House. But the second bill to change the legal climate in West Virginia is embarrassingly wimpy. The House should strengthen it.

Under current state law, a party found only partly responsible for a harmful result may be forced to pay 100 percent of the damages.

The governor proposed only a mild change. Under the Senate bill, defendants found liable for more than 25 percent of the harm could still be forced to pay 100 percent of the damages if other defendants failed to pay their share.

Sen. Vic Sprouse, R-Kanawha, tried to strengthen the bill. "Of the entire realm of tort reform," he complained, "this is the smallest baby step we could take."

His amendment lost 21-13, with most senators voting along party lines.

Is the legislative majority happy with the status quo?

In a fair state, a party found 50 percent responsible for an injury would pay 50 percent of the judgment.

The American Tort Reform Association reports that Alabama, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma have never allowed joint and several liability. Many other states have modified the doctrine to discourage the "lawsuit lottery" atmosphere that has developed.

The association's Web site lists nine "Judicial Hellholes" for 2004 -- a region here, a county there, a city . . . . except for West Virginia's listing, which reads "entire state."

Why would companies invest in such an atmosphere when they can invest in a better one?