Tort reform advances with changes; voter ID passes House

A House committee Thursday advanced a proposed amendment to enact tort reform after approving changes to the resolution that would raise the proposed cap on damages and reduce the Legislature’s influence over Supreme Court rules.

Meanwhile, the full House of Representatives advanced with no debate another proposed constitutional amendment that would require voters to present a photo identification when voting. That measure now moves to the Senate.

The amended version of Senate Joint Resolution 8 by Sen. Missy Irvin, R-Mountain View, passed the House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee 14-3.

As amended, the resolution would cap compensatory damages at the greater of $500,000 or three times the judgment. There would be no cap for damages caused as a result of intentional acts. The original resolution capped punitive damages at the greater of $250,000 or three times the judgment. Noneconomic damages, originally capped at $250,000 in the resolution, were increased to $500,000 in the amendment. The caps can be changed by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature starting in 2019.

A provision that gave the Legislature authority over Supreme Court rules of pleading, practice and procedure was amended so that the Court sets those rules, but the Legislature by a three-fifths vote in both the House and Senate can amend or repeal those rules or adopt their own.

Left alone was a provision limiting lawyers’ contingency fees to one-third of the judgment.

Rep. Bob Ballinger, R-Hindsville, who presented the bill with the amendments, said afterwards that the changes came about as a result of the legislative process and were meant to allay concerns by some committee members. He said sponsors didn’t want the proposal to “squeak by” the committee.

Ballinger said increasing the caps to $500,000 was part of that process.

“What that number does is that actually makes it where most people have the opportunity to be made whole and still get the kind of damages that are necessary to get it, but yet still provide some level of security to businesses, insurance companies and individuals who want to go out and try to earn a living that they’re not going to end up in a situation with a $10 million judgment,” he said.

Legislators are allowed to refer three amendments to the voters, but rules adopted this year allow each chamber to refer one amendment in November 2018, with a third amendment possible with a two-thirds vote by the House and Senate. Unlike with legislation, the governor does not sign the resolution.

Tort reform is the measure being proposed by the Senate. The House’s voter ID amendment, House Joint Resolution 1016 by Rep. Robin Lundstrum, R-Elm Springs, passed the full House 73-21 Thursday with no debate. It now heads to the Senate for consideration.

Under HJR 1016, voters would be required to present a photo identification at their polling place or when voting absentee. The Legislature would establish by law the types of photo identification that would qualify. The state would be required to issue photo IDs at no cost to voters who do not have one. Voters without an ID would be able to cast a provisional ballot.

After Ballinger presented the tort reform proposal, Rep. Warwick Sabin, D-Little Rock, asked him why the Legislature shouldn’t trust juries rather than set a cap. Ballinger said legislators set policies and limit juries in many other ways, such as setting sentencing limits for crimes. He said caps were needed to provide stability and uniformity for businesses.

Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Randy Zook said the amendment would make the state’s overall business and legal climate less threatening. He pointed to a U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform survey showing Arkansas’ legal climate had gone from 34th in 2008 to 41st among corporate counsels and other leading attorneys. He said legislators should allow voters to decide for themselves regarding whether or not to enact the measure.

Among those speaking against the bill was Chief Justice Dan Kemp, who said the amendment’s provisions giving legislators authority over the Supreme Court violates the separation of powers principle.

Arkansas Bar Association President Denise Hoggard said her organization of 5,600 members opposed the bill because the contingency fee system makes it possible for people of all economic classes to hire the lawyer of their choosing. She said lawsuits enhance standards and that the state should not seek to attract employers that would violate them.

Rep. Doug House, R-North Little Rock, argued that a section of the law allowed employees to sue their employers under workers’ compensation laws – a contention Ballinger disputed. House argued that the legislation was taking away a fundamental American right guaranteed as early as the Magna Carta.