Courtney Rowley, One of the Top 100 Civil Plaintiff Trial Lawyers in California
Released from The National Trial Lawyers:
>>>>><<<<<
The National Trial Lawyers Announces Courtney Rowley as One of Its Top 100 Civil Plaintiff Trial Lawyers in California
For Immediate Release
The National Trial Lawyers is pleased to announce that Courtney Rowley of Rowley Law LLC has been selected for inclusion into its Top 100 Civil Plaintiff Trial Lawyers in California, an honor given to only a select group of lawyers for their superior skills and qualifications in the field. Membership in this exclusive organization is by invitation only and is limited to the top 100 attorneys in each state or region who have demonstrated excellence and have achieved outstanding results in their careers in either civil plaintiff or criminal defense law.
The National Trial Lawyers is a professional organization comprised of the premier trial lawyers from across the country who have demonstrated exceptional qualifications in criminal defense or civil plaintiff law. The National Trial Lawyers provides accreditation to these distinguished attorneys, and provides essential legal news, information, and continuing education to trial lawyers across the United States.
With the selection of Courtney Rowley by The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100, she has shown that she exemplifies superior qualifications, leadership skills, and trial results as a trial lawyer. The selection process for this elite honor is based on a multi-phase process which includes peer nominations combined with third party research. As The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100 is an essential source of networking and information for trial attorneys throughout the nation, the final result of the selection process is a credible and comprehensive list of the most outstanding trial lawyers chosen to represent their state or region.
To learn more about The National Trial Lawyers, please visit: http://thenationaltriallawyers.org/.
2022 Massachusetts Excellence in the Law Honoree
We want to congratulate Karen Zahka, a member of the Trial Lawyer for Justice family on being a 2022 Massachusetts Excellence in the Law Honoree!
Each year at Excellence in the Law, Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly celebrates Up & Coming Lawyers and honorees for excellence in pro bono, legal journalism, marketing, firm administration and paralegal work. Learn more about Excellence in the Law here.
Karen is an experienced and passionate trial lawyer. While she was born and raised in Massachusetts, Karen litigates and tries cases nationwide. She is currently admitted to practice in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. She practices in other jurisdictions via pro hac vice. Read more about Karen here.
Congratulations, Karen! We are so proud of you!
Little v. Singh - Daily Journal
Little v. Singh - Daily Journal write up
Decision Making
Decision Making: What are you missing?
SaraEllen on Being Loved as a Female Trial Lawyer
Ready for all the love and all the feelings? SaraEllen Hutchison, one of our many talented national trial lawyers in The Forum, writes about Women Lawyers: No, We Aren’t Too Smart To Be Loved - I healed my lawyer burnout when I finally understood what it means to be a feminine energy lawyer. Read the entire article on Thrive Global here.
SaraEllen writes:
It’s 1997. I’m a college sophomore. Ally McBeal is the lawyer character on TV stirring up the most controversy: is she too thin? Too neurotic? Are all of her problems because her job is too stressful? Or is it really because she can’t keep a good man in her life?
I watch the episode where Ally is prescribed antidepressants, then panics and flushes them down the toilet. And something in me feels seen and heard in a sad, but very real way.
As depicted in the show, becoming a lawyer did not look like it was a recipe for a happy life, but I found her character very relatable. I, too, was a girl who told myself repeatedly that I was too smart to find a good boyfriend, and wondered if it all meant something was seriously wrong with me.
I grew up in Eastern Washington where, back in the day, many people married their high school and college sweethearts and never left. Partly jealous and partly disdainful, my 19-year-old self concluded that law school was where the smart girls like me were supposed to go. I believed — but wouldn’t dare admit — that if I could maximize what seemed to always come easily (academics) I could patch up my great big emotional pothole of not-enoughness and have an admirable feminist life where I championed important causes and stood for something more intellectually significant than what colors to use at one’s wedding.Fast forward to the first year of my law career. I had a new job and a new boyfriend. I finally had achieved all the indicia of successful young adulthood. Quarter-life crisis? That was not going to be me.
But within six months, the pressure to be perfect to keep the approval of both the job and the boyfriend caused me to burn out. I was under tremendous stress, both external and internal, and developed a slew of stress-related health problems: wicked PMS, acne, and fatigue that no conventional or alternative medicine seemed to be able to remedy. In a very clear sign from the Universe, both the boyfriend and the job told me to take a hike in the same week.That was fifteen years ago. Today, I’m healthy and in a great relationship with a nice man. What I know today is that the work stress and the loneliness many women lawyers feel are not separate issues. And thankfully, the law turned out to be the ideal career for me, because I do get to champion important missions.
And one of those missions is this: to lift up the feminine-energy woman lawyers everywhere. I’m one, and if you’re reading this and nodding your head in understanding, you’re probably one too.
Understanding the Feminine Energy Lawyer
First, a quick word on masculine and feminine energy. Here, we are talking about a person’s vibe and the way they relate to themselves and the world. We are not talking strictly about sex or gender. Regardless of your sex or gender, you have a mixture of masculine and feminine energies within you. There is no right or wrong here.
Online Learning VS Classroom Learning
In a time of virtual learning, virtual happy hours and virtual working, we want to take a look at the differences between in-person learning and online learning.
#1 – You can learn whatever you want
Regardless of your age or background, online learning will allow you to login and learn new skills or earn a new degree. The world is, quite literally, your oyster.
#2 – Learn at your own pace anywhere, anytime!
Unlike a traditional classroom, online learning gives you the ability to study wherever and whenever you want. Working a full-time job, but working on a career transition? You can work your classes around your current job.
#3 – You will learn technical skills
If you didn’t understand how to use computer programs and different web interfaces, you will now!
#4 – It costs less
Events, classes, CLE seminars and talks cost less when everyone is remote. There’s no need for hotels, conference rooms, food for attendees, the list goes on. It also costs less for the attendee because you aren’t traveling to the venue, staying at a hotel, etc. Take advantage of having the best talent at your fingertips virtually!
If you’re ready to dive into virtual communities and online classes, we have a few suggestions.
The Forum - A listserv that is more than a listserv. It is an online community that meets virtually multiple times a month. There’s a full document library, video series and more. We offer a student price, monthly pricing and, if you’re in need of assistance, we want you to e-mail us. We never want money to be a deterring factor for why you don’t join The Forum. Contact us at info@trialbywoman.com to discuss.
Our online classes include The Upgrade and The Workshop. Both include CLE credits!
The Upgrade by Trial By Woman is an online course for lawyers to reinvigorate, expand and elevate their practices, adding value to their cases, their work and their lives no matter where they are in their journeys and careers.
This is the only course designed by women, for women, and we are really proud of it. Of course, it’s definitely not ONLY for women—men are very very welcome, in fact the feedback we’ve gotten from men has been overwhelming.
The Workshop is over 4.5 hours of content from our workshop in Boulder, CO and it’s chock full of good info.
We hope you’ll join us!
The Differences in TBI Treatment Between Men and Women
There is not a lot of data on the differences between treatments and outcomes for men and women who have suffered from traumatic brain injury. This study, Differences between Men and Women in Treatment and Outcome after Traumatic Brain Injury looks at just that.
Did they find differences? They sure did. Check out the whole article for a more in depth perspective.
Courtney Named CAALA TLOY Finalist
We are incredibly excited to congratulate Courtney on being named one of the top five finalists for CAALA’s 2020 Trial Lawyer of the Year!
She has been an inspiration during a difficult time and we couldn’t be prouder of all her accomplishments, in and out of the courtroom!
Good luck to all the finalists!
From CAALA:
Following are the names of the nominees and finalists for the award. The CAALA Board of Governors will select the 2020 Trial Lawyer of the Year from the list of five finalists at their meeting on October 15.
TRIAL LAWYER OF THE YEAR
BRIAN BREITER
CHRIS DOLAN*
RICARDO ECHEVERRIA
SOPHIE ETEMADI
DAVID FELDMAN
DALE GALIPO*
LIZ HERNANDEZ
ARASH HOMAMPOUR
PAUL KIESEL
JOSEPH LOW*
SHAWN MCCANN
BRIAN PANISH
BRIAN POULTER
ALAN ROMERO*
COURTNEY ROWLEY*
GENE SULLIVAN
JORDANNA THIGPEN
FINALIST*
What is most important?
“When we base the value of our cases on the socioeconomic status of our clients we are complicit in a system wrought with discrimination.” -Courtney Rowley
What is most important to you? Is it your economic assets or your noneconomic assets?
Trial by Woman believes that no matter our differences, not matter our disagreements, we have a lot more in common than we think, especially when it comes to what we as human beings value most in our lives: our relationships, our experiences, our health, our families. In the law, this is called our noneconomic assets, or noneconomic damages.
When we define someone by their economic assets—how much money they make (or don’t), what educational opportunities they did (or didn’t) have, what their paycheck says (which is zero if they happen to be a stay at home mom or a student or a grandparent or a child), or what kind of health care they do (or don’t) have, we don’t just mistakenly undervalue our cases, we undervalue our collective humanity, and we are complicit in a system that legally reinforces the idea that certain (affluent) folks are worth more than others. This isn’t just unfair and unconstitutional, it’s prejudiced.
In a lot of states, there are measures on the upcoming ballot to cap, or limit, the values we share, what we call the human damages, noneconomic damages, to amounts proposed and favorable to the insurance defense industry.
You want to change the world?
Begin with changing how you value your cases.
And vote.
TBW Work Hour Zoom Guide
Take your Zoom meetings to the next level. We developed this guide for our Forum-only TBW Work Hours. Interested in joining? Check out The Forum here.
Questionnaires: Voir Dire and Opening Statement
This is a page from our book with Wendy Saxon, Voire Dire and Opening Statement, published by Trial Guides, on how to get co-counsel on board when you are filing juror questionnaires for trial.
We have not tried a post Covid case yet, but as we gear up (stoked) for our first one, we are writing questionnaires to help navigate this new world.
What do you think about questionnaires?
Will you use them when you get back to court?
What new questions will you include that you didn’t include before?
Xoxo
C
The Fight for Maternal Medical Care
The fight for justice for those who have lost their lives to medical negligence is never-ending. We hope you’ll watch this news clip about Kira, who passed away after she was allowed to bleed after giving birth.
Her husband began a non-profit to raise awareness about maternal care. You can find that site here.
Watch the news clip here: https://mms.tveyes.com/Transcript.asp?StationID=306&DateTime=7%2F13%2F2020+11%3A16%3A53+PM&LineNumber=&MediaStationID=306&playclip=True&RefPage=&pbc=WatchlistTerm%3A1999144
Transcript of the video:
KNBC-LA (NBC) - Los Angeles, CA
NBC4 News at 11 pm+ Local Market Viewership: 153,671Local Publicity Value: $21,736.00per 30sKNBC 7/13/2020 11:16:53 PM: ...beverly white, nbc 4 news. >>> turning tragedy into action. a man who lost his wife shortly after she gave birth is pushing now to change state and federal law to help protect more women from pregnancy-related deaths. nbc 4's carolyn johnson with the story. >> hey, langston, been waiting on you, buddy. >> reporter: that's the voice of charles johnson, a he and his wife keira watched second son langston take their first breath. but yourself hours later, keira took her last breath. >> when you look at the medical records, and the medical records around 6:30, she was classified as a surgical emergency. >> reporter: she was bleeding internally. but despite her deteriorating condition, keira implored her husband to stay calm. >> as i look back and i play this over in my head, almost like i do every day, what she understood just being frank is that if i lost my temper, if i yelled, if i slammed my fist on station, then as an african american man, i would be seen as a threat. >> reporter: it was after midnight before she finally went back into surgery. >> when they took her back into surgery and opened her up, there were three liters of blood in her abdomen where she had been allowed to suffer and bleed needlessly for almost ten hours. and her heart stoppedd they weren't able the save her. >> it's amazing. >> reporter: this healthy, vibrant woman lost her life after a scheduled cesarean at cedars-sinai, and dr. nieen called grossly legitimate in keira's death and the deaths of several other women by the california medical board is still delivering babies, although no longer at cedars. >> you all are sending a loud definitive message to this state and this country that women can be killed without consequence. >> reporter: charles testified before the medical board after learning it had placed dr. naeem on probation for just four years during which time he is not allowed to teach or supervise other doctors or nurse. >> he is a repeat offender but still able to practice medicine. >> reporter: the doctor paid a $1 million settlement to charles johnson. the case against cedars-sinai is scheduled for trial this fall. the hospital says privacy laws prevent them from discussing the case, but they did issue this statement to the i-team saying in part cedars-sinai faculty members support efforts to improve care and prevent maternal deaths and are actively involved in community, state, and federal initiatives to ...
Black Lives Matter
Dear Trial By Woman,
For the last week, along side of you, we’ve seen the continued impact of systemic racism in our country. Our hearts break for George Floyd, his loved ones, and the countless and often unnamed Black Americans who have been harmed, affected, killed and fallen prey to racial inequality and violence. It’s not enough to say Black Lives Matter when this generation's long cycle of oppression continues.
As white business owners, mothers, and lawyers, the questions we keep asking ourselves and each other is how can we use our privilege to take action towards a more just and equitable world?
There are heavy, enormous issues happening in our world right now. We are in the middle of a global pandemic, one which is disproportionately affecting Black Americans. In our practices, we see black mothers dying in our country at three to four the times the rate of white mothers. Persons of color are harmed and killed by medical malpractice at rates far, far greater than white patients due to institutional racism in healthcare. “Impassioned Rallies, mostly peaceful, continue across the United States”— NY Times. We believe that lawyers are leaders, and that we, all of us, are capable of making great change in our lifetimes and building a safer, better future for all of our children.
We will renew and deepen our commitment to inclusivity and are here—now and long after-- to support you and each other as we work towards an equitable, decent world.
Here are some of the resources we at Trial By Woman are drawing on to be part of the change:
Articles We Have Read/Are Reading:
In Defense of Looting
Your Black Colleagues May Look Like They’re Okay—Chances are They’re Not
The Case for Reparations by Ta-Nehisi Coates
The Damage that White Onlookers Inflict
Books We Have Read/Are Reading:
How to be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X Kendi
White Fragility by Robin Diangelo
Me and White Supremacy by Layla Saad
Online Resources:
Free Course in How to Somatically Abolish White Body Supremacy and Address Trauma by Resmaa Menakem
Beyond Inclusion, Beyond Empowerment
Parenting Resources:
31 Childrens books to support conversations on race, racism and resistance
Conscious Kid
Opportunities to Donate:
The Bail Project
NAACP Defense Fund
xx,
Courtney and Theresa
immUNITY with Trial By Woman
The TBW Zoom Meeting Guide
Download the TBW Zoom Meeting Guide WITH CLICKABLE LINKS! Or check it out below.
The COVID-19 Financial Resiliency Kit
The COVID-19 Financial Resiliency Kit
The financial strain has affected millions of people during the pandemic. We consolidated resources for you in a financial toolkit. Stimulus packages have been passed, unemployment benefits have changed. There’s a lot to digest. We hope you find these links and articles helpful.
How Your Business Can Take Advantage of the 2T Stimulus Package
The Cares Act - Expands unemployment benefits to $600/week and extends the time allowed. It includes a payroll tax relief, including employee retention tax credits, the deferral of all employer social security tax payments. Seek out advice from your tax advisor.
Unemployment Benefits - Federal Link
Unemployment Benefits - Find Your State Link
Small Business Administration’s COVID-19 Options
Small Business Administration’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program
Boxer, Christine, Pelosi support California initiative boosting MICRA cap
By Angela Hart
12/16/2019 07:58 PM EST
SACRAMENTO — Former U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer on Monday threw her support behind a November ballot initiative to increase a decades-old cap on compensation in California medical negligence cases.
Boxer, speaking at a press conference launching a signature-gathering effort, said she hopes to spend a "tremendous amount of time" on the campaign. In a brief interview with POLITICO, the former Democratic senator said she's long supported increasing the compensation cap, set in California at $250,000 for non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, disability and disfigurement.
The proposal would index the legal payout cap for inflation — initially raising it to $1.2 million while also allowing juries to award more. Boxer argued that providers would be more responsive to patients and improve care if they are afraid of an expensive lawsuit.
"You're going to have to pay hard if you destroy a life," she said.
Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and chairwoman of California Democratic Party's women's caucus, also vowed to work on the campaign, casting it as an women's issue.
"When you talk about the people who are making health care decisions for their families and the people who are taking time off ... it largely falls on women," Pelosi said. "And so these caps, while they certainly fall on dads and sons, they fall disproportionately on moms, on women."
Opponents of changing the 1975 Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, including the California Medical Association, California Hospital Association and medical malpractice insurance industry, have stayed mostly silent so far. In general, they argue that raising the payout limit would drive health care costs even higher.
The groups are part of Californians Allied for Patient Protection, a coalition that also argues the initiative would benefit "wealthy trial attorneys."
"Their solution would dramatically spike health care costs for everyone, reduce access in communities that need it the most ... and cost state taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars," said Lisa Maas, executive director of the coalition.
Trial lawyer Nick Rowley, leading the effort with Consumer Watchdog, said backers are prepared to spend $40 million — including $10 million of his own money. Proponents said they expect opponents would spend far more.
"I'm not doing it for they money. I'm not doing it to make a single attorney fee," Rowley said. "I've had to look hundreds of people in the eye and tell them that ... in the state of California, civil justice is only worth $250,000."
Consumer Watchdog's Jamie Court didn't rule out a legislative deal to keep the initiative off the ballot. He and other proponents were meeting Monday with Gov. Gavin Newsom's legislative secretary, Anthony Williams.
Rowley, however, was skeptical that a deal with Newsom and the Legislature would adequately compensate victims and their families for medical negligence. "Raising the cap for inflation is not enough," Rowley said, noting that he wants to give juries the power to determine non-economic financial compensation.
Voir Dire and Opening Statement
From Trial Guides - See original book page here
This book is currently on pre-order and will ship on or before February 25th, 2020.
Over the course of their careers, Nicholas Rowley, Courtney Rowley, and Dr. Wendy Saxon have worked on over a thousand jury trials and obtained over a billion dollars in settlements and verdicts. In Voir Dire & Opening Statement, they use annotated excerpts of successful voir dire transcripts and opening statements to teach you the tools they use to win just outcomes for their clients.
In part one of their book, Nicholas Rowley and Courtney Rowley provide insights and strategies for successfully selecting the best jury for your client’s case. They address how they deal with their own fears and trepidations, and challenge preconceived ideas about how to connect with and empower each juror to deliver a just verdict. You will learn how to put important case issues front and center in voir dire, and how to get potential jurors to excuse themselves for cause on an inability to be fair and impartial.
In part two, Dr. Wendy Saxon discusses practical strategies for understanding small group dynamics and juror body language, collecting and disseminating personal information, and identifying jurors who will be good for your case. Dr. Saxon examines juror questionnaires and courtroom worksheets and shows how you can use them to identify bias and ways to structure them to help avoid objections from the defense and judge. Dr. Saxon offers strategies for selecting jurors when you are not allowed voir dire at all, and for when you are severely limited on time. She also discusses perspectives and scenarios on juror rehabilitation and offers a fully annotated jury questionnaire that is included in the appendix.
In part three, Nicholas Rowley and Courtney Rowley teach the Trial by Human approach to creating and delivering a winning opening statement. They discuss identifying your theme, being brutally honest about the good-bad-ugly of your case, simplifying complex terminology, using visuals and the importance of telling a story that jurors can visualize, sequencing your opening to capture jurors’ attention, bringing noneconomic damages to life, using jury instructions to discuss damages, dealing with objections, addressing expert testimony, how to effectively follow your opening statement with your first witness, and building credibility to further develop the human connections you need to win. The authors also provide annotated excerpts from successful opening statements to demonstrate how you can start applying their lessons to your next case.
Fairness for Injured Patients Act - FIPA 2020
Fairness for Injured Patients Act - FIPA 2020
All information brought to you by www.fairnessact.org -> click here
Question and Answers About The Fairness For Injured Patients Act (FIPA)
What will the ballot initiative do if enacted?
The initiative will adjust for inflation the maximum $250,000 compensation cap set in 1975 by politicians on quality of life and wrongful death survivor damages – bringing it up to $1.2 million. The $250,000 cap is worth today only $50,000 in 1975 dollars.
Judges and jurors will also be allowed to decide that compensation above the cap is appropriate in cases of catastrophic injury or death.
Juries will be informed about the existence of the cap – now the judge reduces their verdict after they leave the room because juries are not told of the cap.
The collateral source rules that apply in other civil cases will also apply in medical negligence actions and periodic payments for medical negligence verdicts and judgments will be disallowed.
Attorneys who file medical negligence lawsuits will be required to file a certificate of merit and attorneys who file meritless lawsuits alleging medical negligence will pay the doctors’ attorney’s fees and costs. This, along with extending the time patients have to file, as in other civil cases, will provide sufficient time to obtain a certificate of merit and will deter and reduce the number of meritless lawsuits.
What does the compensation cap set by politicians in 1975 apply to?
In 1975, California politicians set a maximum compensation cap of $250,000 on the value of quality of life damages for patients who are injured or maimed and on the total recovery allowable to an entire family whose loved one is killed because of medical negligence. The maximum compensation any patient-victim is entitled to for disfigurement, permanent damage to quality of life, physical impairment, disability, pain, loss of a limb, blindness, and other quality of life damages is $250,000. Even brain damaged babies and children with spastic quadriplegia and cerebral palsy caused by medical negligence are limited to $250,000 as maximum quality of life compensation by this 1975 legislative cap despite the fact that they will never be able to walk, talk, eat, or live any facet of a normal human life.
Does California have the most regressive medical negligence law in America?
Yes. More than two-thirds of the states in the nation do not have caps like California, including New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. 20 states and the District of Columbia have no caps at all. 14 other states have caps with exemptions for wrongful death or catastrophic injury. California is 1 of just 3 states with a cap as low as $250,000 with no exceptions. (Read more about other states’ laws at https://www.consumerwatchdog.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/FIPAFctSheetStateCaps10-2-19_0.pdf )
“Economic” damages aren’t capped – why aren’t those enough to cover victims’ costs?
Since economic damages are calculated based largely on lost wages, injured patients without an income, like stay at home parents or children, or earners without a significant income do not receive fair compensation. In addition, many negligence victims can work, so they have no lost wages due to their injuries.
Injured patients’ recovery for medical and other costs is also limited. Under the 1975 law, future medical bills and other costs caused by medical negligence that should be paid to victims by wrongdoers can instead be reduced by the availability of health insurance and taxpayer funded programs, as well as other “collateral sources” of income, such as life insurance and long term care policies. This rule is unlike auto accidents and other types of civil cases where wrongdoers pay the cost of the harm they cause. The initiative changes this and makes the “collateral source” rules for medical malpractice and other civil cases the same.
Medical costs and other needs resulting from malpractice are often unpredictable at the time of the verdict, so injured patients are not compensated enough to be able to afford unanticipated treatments or items they need in the future.
Which groups does the 1975 compensation cap impact most?
The current 1975 law unfairly discriminates against women and their survivors because women do not receive equal pay and also do not receive fair compensation for losses that specifically affect women, like loss of fertility, failure to diagnose breast and cervical cancer, and injuries to women during childbirth.
Children, who do not have wage loss, and must endure a lifetime of the loss of quality of life under a one-size-fits all cap are also unfairly targeted. In the case of a child who dies, the maximum recovery is only $250,000.
Low income individuals are not fairly compensated for their losses, which are based almost exclusively on wage loss, and often cannot find attorneys to take their cases.
Minorities are more likely to be uncompensated for their losses because they earn lower wages on average. Disparities in health care mean minorities are also more likely to experience medical negligence because they are more likely to be uninsured or underinsured, receive poorer quality health care, and experience worse health outcomes.
Retired and elderly individuals are also less likely to find attorneys or be fairly compensated for their losses because they are less likely to have high incomes. When a retired person with no dependents dies, the maximum recovery is $250,000.
How does the economics of the 1975 cap deny victims access to justice today?
Since the cap has never been indexed for inflation, the maximum a consumer and their contingency fee attorney can recover in many cases is $250,000. The attorney must take their fee and all the costs of a case, including court fees and expert testimony, from that total recovery. These costs can easily reach $100,000 or more. A medical negligence case in the event of a child’s death, for example, is limited to a total of $250,000, with fees and costs deducted from that amount. The economics make these cases nearly impossible for a contingency fee attorney to bring and prevents wrongdoers from being held accountable.
Will the initiative raise health care costs?
FIPA will reduce health care costs. The cost of caring for undeterred medical negligence adds significant costs to the health care system, which today are borne by California taxpayers and health care insurance providers rather than wrongdoers. Increasing payouts to victims, ending unfair rules on reduction for “collateral sources” of payments and ending periodic payments will limit the shifting of costs onto health insurance policyholders and taxpayer-funded public programs. Wrongdoers will pay for their mistakes, rather than the health care system and the government. Deterrence of preventable medical injuries, injuries that add billions annually to our health care costs, will increase dramatically.
