News - Oklahoma Medical and Healthcare Professional Malpractice Liability Insurance

Staff and wire reports

OKLAHOMA CITY — Democrats in the Oklahoma Senate — the chamber’s minority party for the first time in a century of statehood — say the new Republican majority is using partisanship to impose public policy by excluding key Democrat-ic senators from committees they once dominated.

Differences over corrections, civil justice and health issues are behind GOP attempts to silence the opposition and ex-clude Democrats from policy decisions as Republicans try to stack the deck to accomplish their political goals, according to the Senate’s Democratic leaders.

Not unexpectedly, Republicans see things differently. Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City, said some Democratic senators have acted as obstructionists while presiding over the Senate’s committee structure and blocking GOP attempts to enact policies they favored.

“There are certain reforms that I want to try to get done,” Coffee said. “Many of these ideas have not gotten done because they have stood in the way of them and they have not gotten to the governor’s desk.”

Coffee, a former mi-nority leader when Demo-crats dominated the 48-member Senate, said Democratic bellyaching is an indication they are learning how challenging political life can be when you’re in the minority.

State Sen. David Myers of Ponca City, whose district includes part of Garfield County, said it is no different than when the Democrats were in control.

“When the Republicans were in the minority our job was to call attention to what we thought were unfair practices. Now they are doing the same thing. As the minority, since you’re not in control the only alternative you have is to throw rocks. That’s the way it works. The majority party makes the decisions on who chairs the committee and who is on it. It’s nothing different than normal,” Myers said.

Republicans took a 26-22 majority in the Senate in the Nov. 4 general election after sharing power with Democrats in an evenly divided chamber the past two years.

The election gave Repub-licans total control of the Legislature for the first time in state history. The GOP wrested control of the state House from Democrats in 2004 for the first time in 80 years.

“As a member of the majority, I know full well the obstacles they face,” Coffee said. “I’m pushing my agenda forward. Being part of the opposition is part of the Democratic process.”

The Senate’s committee assignments became an issue after Coffee rejected suggestions by Democratic Leader Charlie Laster of Shawnee certain Democrats with expertise in various areas of government be assigned to committees that they had formerly headed.

Laster issued a news release in which he suggested Sen. Kenneth Corn, D-Poteau, be placed on the Senate Appro-priations Subcommittee on Public Safety, a committee he formerly chaired.

He also suggested Sen. Tom Adelson, D-Tulsa, Gov. Brad Henry’s former secretary of health, serve on the Appropri-ations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services and Sen. Richard Lerblance, D-Hartshorne, serve on the Senate Judiciary and Energy committees, which he formerly chaired.

Laster said he aired the suggestions publicly because of the cool reception he received while attempting to discuss them with Coffee privately.

“There wasn’t really hardly any talking about it. It was just, ‘This is how it’s going to be,’” Laster said. “I just don’t see any good reason for it. Instead of a good reason, he started calling them names.

“Obstructionist should not be defined as someone who disagrees with Sen. Coffee. We pride ourselves on being a deliberative body.”

Democrats said Republican control of the Senate has brought a new level of partisanship to the chamber long considered the Legis-lature’s most collegial.

“I think Sen. Coffee has raised the level of political partisanship to that of Washington,” Corn said. “There’s no respect for people who have expertise.”

“I think that shows a lack of leadership,” said Lerblance. “It looks like it’s going to be partisanship right down the line.”

Corn said he has worked on corrections issues for years. A state prison, the Jim E. Hamilton Correctional Center, is located in his district and he has visited most of the publicly operated prisons in the state, Corn said.

But Corn said he opposes Republican attempts to use more private prisons to house the state’s burgeoning inmate population. Corn said a heavy reliance on private prisons beds could lead prison operators to demand unrealistic reimbursement rates for housing state inmates.

“We cannot put taxpayers in the position that they are over a barrel,” said Corn, who favors expanding the public prison system.

“They have resisted it every step of the way. They want to use private prisons,” he said.

Coffee said private prisons “are a lower cost resolution for our prison crisis” and the state’s corrections strategy should include both private and public institutions.

Corn “took us completely away from private prison beds and took away our flexibility,” Coffee said.

Republicans have accused Lerblance of sidetracking changes to the state’s civil justice system GOP supporters say will reduce the number of frivolous lawsuits and lower the cost of business and medical malpractice insurance.

Lerblance said he takes exception to Coffee labeling him an obstructionist.

“In my last five years in the Senate, I have been anything other than an obstructionist,” Lerblance said. “In essence, he’s trying to shut me up. I still have the ability to speak.”

Democrats indicated they will not accept their exclusion from the committees in silence.

“Y’all might see some filibustering going on this year. We haven’t seen that in a while,” Lerblance said.

Laster said he wants the Senate’s focus to return to serving the state and its citizens when lawmakers convene the 2009 Legislature on Feb. 2.

“But it’s hard when we’re having to defend ourselves from an attempt to silence the minority,” Laster said. “It’s clearly partisanship. I think it sets a real bad tone for the session. Things have got to get better.”

By JEFF GORMAN 

     (CN) - An Oklahoma law imposing a statute of limitations on medical negligence complaints is unconstitutional because it treats medical cases differently than other cases, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled.
     The family of Shirley Woods sued the Unity Health Center, but the trial court dismissed the case because the defendant was not served with a summons within 180 days of filing.
     The Woods family then challenged the constitutionality of the law, and Justice Winchester agreed, citing the court’s 2006 decision in Zeier v. Zimmer Inc.
     That case was another successful constitutional challenge to a law that required a medical malpractice claimant to attach an affidavit of merit to the petition.
     ”Just as the statute in Zeier impermissibly singled out medical negligence plaintiffs for different procedural treatment, so too does (this statute),” Winchester wrote. “We determine that is an unconstitutional special law.” 

The Edmond Sun
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A group of physicians, fearful that frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits may increase, called on Gov. Brad Henry Friday to convene a special session of the Legislature to consider changes to the state’s civil justice system.

Legislative leaders have said that civil justice reform is at the top of their agenda, but spokespersons for the governor and lawmakers said there is little chance they will take up the issue before they convene their regular legislative session in February.

“…With the start of the regular session less than two months away, it would probably (be) more prudent and would save taxpayer money to wait until February to address this issue,” said Thomas D. Larson, Henry’s deputy press secretary.

Jennifer Monies, spokeswoman for House Speaker Chris Benge, R-Tulsa, said the Oklahoma Legislature is not authorized to meet until after an organizational day in January where lawmakers will ratify leaders of the House and Senate following the Nov. 4 general election.

Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City, said resolving the issue will be crucial to maintaining access to top quality medical care in the state.

“Lawsuit reform will continue to be a top priority no matter when we convene,” Coffee said.

Dr. Jack Beller, former president of the Oklahoma State Medical Association, said legislation that helped reduce the number of meritless lawsuits against physicians has been struck down by the Oklahoma Supreme Court and the issue can’t wait.

“This issue is a hot issue right now,” said Beller, an orthopedic surgeon who appeared with other physicians at the state Capitol.

In 2003, obstetrical and emergency physician specialists were so frequently targeted by unwarranted lawsuits that medical malpractice coverage became difficult to find, Beller said. “We saw a significant loss of access to medical care,” he said.

As many as 50 lawsuits were filed each month against doctors, a number that dropped 40 percent after new civil justice guidelines went into effect, Miller said.

“We don’t want to see that go back up again,” he said.

Legislation previously approved by lawmakers included caps on noneconomic damages for lawsuits involving obstetrics and emergency room physicians and required plaintiffs to obtain a certificate of merit before they could file a medical liability lawsuit.

Last month, the Supreme Court struck down some civil justice reform guidelines, ruling that it was an unconstitutional special law that “targets for different treatment less than an entire class of similarly situated persons or things,” establishing inequity.

Beller said any new civil justice legislation must be written to conform to Supreme Court guidelines. He said legislation must be applied to all lawsuits of a particular category, not just medical malpractice lawsuits.

BOSTON, MA, Dec 10, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) — New Jersey physicians and hospitals will see a drop in medical liability insurance rates from ProSelect Insurance Company (”ProSelect”), a member of ProMutual Group. Physicians and surgeons will receive an 11 percent decrease while healthcare facilities, including hospitals and clinics, will receive a 7.5 percent decrease. The company’s decision will impact more than 3,000 physicians and many of the state’s hospitals and facilities. The rate change became effective on December 1, 2008.“We’ve spent the better part of a decade working closely with New Jersey’s healthcare providers to help mitigate risk and increase safety on the front lines of patient care,” said Richard W. Brewer, president and CEO of ProMutual Group. “We’ve also been behind the scenes maintaining conservative investment and management practices to uphold the strong financial condition of the company. After weathering the peaks and valleys of the business, it is because of these prudent practices that we are now able to provide this significant base rate decrease.”

The company’s sound underwriting practices have had a considerable impact on its ability to maintain financial stability and lower rates in New Jersey. Additionally, aggressive claim defense and proactive risk management have resulted in decreased losses and controlled costs. Likewise, the close relationships fostered between the ProMutual Group team, policyholders and independent agents is important in managing risk and providing physicians and hospitals with the resources and services they need to practice excellent medicine.

“Careful management focused on longevity rather than short term goals led to this decision to lower rates,” said Michael R. Kubik, vice president of marketing for ProMutual Group. “Not only will our insureds benefit from today’s lowered rates, but they also have the comfort of knowing that our entire team is supporting them from the moment they book their policy and for years to come.”

Throughout its tenure in New Jersey, ProMutual Group has been an active supporter of state and local medical societies and associations. The company also recently presented a donation to the New Jersey State Medical Society’s Physician Health Services to promote physician well-being.

For more information about ProMutual Group’s products and services visit the company’s web site at www.promutualgroup.com. You may also contact Nina Akerley to speak with a company representative at nakerley@promutualgroup.com or (617) 946-8665.

About ProMutual Group

ProMutual Group is one of the leading providers of medical liability insurance in the Northeast, insuring more than 18,000 physicians, surgeons, and dentists as well as a large number of hospitals, health centers and clinics. It is one of the top 10 medical liability insurance providers in the country based on direct written premium.* ProMutual Group has in excess of $2.2 billion in net admitted assets, more than $600 million in policyholder surplus and over $300 million in direct written premium as of 2007. ProMutual Group has a Best’s Rating of A- (Excellent), and is acknowledged as a leader in providing risk management and claim services to the healthcare community.

Based in Massachusetts, ProMutual Group member companies also operate in Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont. ProMutual Group distributes its products through independent agents. For more information, visit ProMutual Group’s web site at www.promutualgroup.com.

* U.S. Medical Malpractice - 2007 Direct Premiums Written, Best’s Review, August 2008.

By Michael McNutt
Capitol Bureau

A bill that would affect how lawsuits are treated in court cases ranging from personal injury to medical malpractice passed a House committee Wednesday evening after it was slipped into another measure.

“This is about politics and politics only,” said Rep. Richard Morrisette, D-Oklahoma City. “The governor vetoed this bill last year and I suspect he’ll do the same thing. This is an election year. This is a set-up bill.”

Sullivan said the bill would “make a level and clear playing field available for everyone who does business in the state of Oklahoma.”

Similar measure was vetoed before

Henry vetoed last year’s lawsuit reform measure in late April. Discussions during the waning days of last year’s legislative session produced no compromise.”We will need to review the latest bill to see what is in it,” the governor’s spokesman, Paul Sund, said Wednesday night. “It will be problematic if it is essentially the same bill with the same objectionable language in it.”

Among other things, the bill would cap noneconomic damages, which generally are for pain and suffering, at $300,000. It would limit a jury to award punitive damages only if it found intentional or gross negligence by clear and convincing evidence.

Henry in vetoing last year’s lawsuit reform measure said he concluded several provisions of the bill were unconstitutional, and it unduly restricted Oklahomans’ ability to seek justice. He also thought it did not do enough to curb frivolous lawsuits.

Republican legislative leaders last year criticized the Democratic governor’s action.

Sen. James Williamson, R-Tulsa, two weeks ago challenged Henry to make a counter-offer to the lawsuit reform measure.

Rep. Scott Inman, D-Oklahoma City, a member of the Judiciary and Public Safety Committee, opposed this year’s bill.

“This is the same thing we dealt with last year,” said Inman,. “We’re a state that’s tough on crime but soft on negligence.”

by Marie Price
The Journal Record

April 3, 2008

OKLAHOMA CITY – In 2003, if an Oklahoma medical doctor needed malpractice insurance, the Physicians Liability Insurance Co., founded by the Oklahoma State Medical Association, was pretty much the only game in town – and it was in trouble.

At the time, PLICO insured between 80 percent and 85 percent of Oklahoma physicians.  In November of that year, PLICO officials asked the Oklahoma Insurance Department for a whopping 82.8-percent rate hike, which would have cost doctors more than $40 million in 2004.  That was on top of a 60-percent rate increase for 2003.

PLICO’s request sparked the first-ever rate hearing as mandated by a new Oklahoma tort reform statute. The law required then-insurance Commissioner Carroll Fisher to conduct a hearing if doctors asked for one. Several physicians told Fisher that such a massive rate boost would damage their practices. Some said the PLICO filing penalized them, even though they had no history of malpractice lawsuits.

Dr. Carl Hook, PLICO president and CEO, said the average Oklahoma doctor saw his or her liability insurance rates increase between 300 percent and 325 percent between 2001 and 2005.  Hook said a spike in malpractice claims and verdict amounts fed PLICO’s problems.  However, plaintiffs’ verdicts were not the insurer’s only woes.  “Our insurance was much less expensive than surrounding (states), and we offered larger limits than other insurance did,” said Hook. “That is some of the problem of why we got into financial problems.”  Hook said that PLICO no longer offers the $5 million policy limits it once wrote.  In 2003, PLICO was still writing occurrence-based policies, not the claims-made insurance it offers today. Generally speaking, an occurrence policy covers incidents that happen during the policy period, without regard to when claims are reported. Claims-made insurance covers incidents that happen and are reported while the policy is in force.

Hook said that PLICO had no reinsurance on its occurrence book of business, because reinsurers would no longer cover it.  Ultimately, Fisher approved the requested increase, but spread it out over three years. PLICO also stopped writing occurrence policies in mid 2004.  “We were able to purchase reinsurance at that time,” Hook said. “So, we’re reinsured for new claims originating since July of ‘04.”  Hook said that PLICO had 1,250 open claims when new management took over in 2005, a figure that has since been cut to about 250, on its old book of business. He said that PLICO has a couple of hundred open claims on its new types of policies.  He also said that PLICO has been able to reduce the average amount of time it takes to resolve a case from five and one-half years to less than four years, with a goal of three and one-half years. He said the industry average is about five years.  “That’s the bad thing about litigation of medical malpractice,” Hook said. “You’ve got to charge your physicians premiums now for what you may need to be spending on them four and five years down the road. That’s hard to predict.”

It’s also part of what got the company into trouble, he said.  “They did not charge enough premiums in the late ‘90s and 2000 and 2001,” Hook said. “The actuaries did not predict what we were going to need in monies, and we came up woefully short. That’s a real long tail, because it takes so long for these things to work through the process.”  Hook said lack of reinsurance also made PLICO “very, very careful” about going to trial due to its potentially increased exposure; the company became more likely to settle cases. He said the revamped PLICO is much more aggressive about taking cases to trial, and it’s winning them.  Hook said that PLICO did not have the troubles with investments experienced by some companies in recent years, because it was not allowed to invest in stock or equities.  “Our entire portfolio was in government bonds,” he said. “They’re very stable. They don’t make you a lot of money, but those are the only investments we’ve had since our inception.”  Along with the rate hikes and other changes, the Oklahoma Legislature also got involved, giving PLICO four years to dig its way out of the financial hole. That four years expires at the end of this year.

However, PLICO officials announced last October that the insurance company had overcome a $143 million surplus deficit after only two-and-one-half years.

“Now, we’re building positive capital to make us the strongest the company has ever been,” Hook said. “We’ve equaled the best financial condition that PLICO’s ever been, in its 28-year history.”  Might that good news lead to rate cuts for physicians?  “I don’t know when we’re going to be able to lower (rates),” Hook said. “But I am anxiously waiting for that to happen. I want to reward our loyal physicians that stayed with us and had faith in the company.”

PLICO has lost a lot of doctors to the handful of new professional liability insurers that have come into Oklahoma over the last few years, but still insures more than half of the state’s doctors. Hook said some of those out-of-state firms are selling insurance to Oklahoma doctors at rates cheaper than they offer elsewhere, to undercut PLICO.

Overall, Hook said, PLICO’s rates compare favorably with insurers in surrounding states.  Hook said most PLICO policyholders saw decreased insurance costs for 2007 and 2008 in the form of individually discounted premiums. In a new program, physicians can complete risk management requirements this year to earn additional credits toward next year’s premium costs.  Hook said the company hasn’t raised base rates in a couple of years, “but we are discounting those doctors who have excellent loss experience,” he said.

Jan. 12–The Civil Appeals Court says the law subjects medical malpractice plaintiffs to a higher standard.

OKLAHOMA CITY — For at least the second time in slightly more than a year, a state appeals court has told lawsuit reform proponents that they got it wrong. The Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals has struck down a lawsuit reform statute, saying it treats medical malpractice plaintiffs differently from others who file lawsuits. The decision comes in the wake of a 2006 Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling that tossed another measure. The justices said it put medical negligence cases in a separate class from all other negligence claims and created a monetary barrier to the courts by requiring an expert witness to attest to a case’s merits. The most recent decision comes just weeks before lawmakers return to the Capitol, where a renewed battle over lawsuit reform is expected. Last year, Gov. Brad Henry vetoed a controversial lawsuit reform measure, Senate Bill 507, saying several provisions were unconstitutional, unduly restricted access to the courts, and didn’t do enough to curb frivolous lawsuits. Senate Co-President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City, said lawsuit reform will be on the agenda of Senate Republicans, who “will continue to advocate for comprehensive, broad-based and meaningful reforms like those in the lawsuit reform package we put on the governor’s desk in 2007.” The Court of Civil Appeals decision issued Thursday said Lisa K. Jones could pursue her case in Oklahoma County for the alleged wrongful death of her husband, Michael W. Jones, who died after surgery at an Oklahoma City hospital. The trial court had tossed Jones’ case after she failed to inform defendants of the suit within 180 days.The appeals court said a tort reform package passed in 2003 that required such notification treated medical malpractice plaintiffs differently. The opinion said other plaintiffs had the ability to show the court why notification was not made within 180 days but that medical negligence plaintiffs had no such opportunity. The law “holds medical negligence plaintiffs to different and stricter standards than any other plaintiffs,” the opinion states.Diane Hinkle, a lawyer for Jones, said the Richardson Law Firm in Tulsa handled the appeal but not the initial case.”The court is saying again, as the Oklahoma Supreme Court said, this is a special law that singles out a class of plaintiffs and subjects them to law in which there is a general law in place that affects all plaintiffs,” Hinkle said. Rusty Hendrickson, an Oklahoma City lawyer who represented Dr. Jay P. Cannon, said the case will be appealed. Integris Baptist Medical Center also was named as a defendant in the suit. An attorney for the hospital could not be reached for comment. The law was enacted to require a patient who files a malpractice suit to give timely notice of it, Hendrickson said.”It was a reasonable attempt to further the goal of lawsuit reform and further legitimate state interests,” he said. “A physician who doesn’t even learn he has been sued until years after the care and treatment he provided is placed at a terrible disadvantage in defending a lawsuit.”

——Barbara Hoberock (405) 528-2465barbara.hoberock@tulsaworld.com

It is being reported that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is calling for a cap to be put on medical malpractice lawsuits, a fact that will surely win him votes from the medical community.

Due to huge malpractice amounts being awarded to plaintiffs, many doctors working in the US are being forced out of work due to rising costs of insurance associated with malpractice.

“I believe we have to enact federal caps on non-economic and punitive damages related to malpractice,” Romney said. “These lottery-sized awards and frivolous lawsuits may enrich the trial lawyers but they put a heavy burden on doctors, hospitals and, of course through defensive medicine, they put a burden on the entire health care system.”

“We’ve got to reign in the incessant cost of medical liability,” he added.

Romney, speaking in front of approximately 500 students at an Iowa medical school stated that he would encourage the founding of health courts with judges who were experienced in the handling of medical liability.

When asked about his version of a health care system compared to Hillary Clinton’s he said: “My approach is based on the free enterprise system and personal responsibility and hers is based on government. Government reliance is not a conservative principal and that’s what exists throughout the country except now in Massachusetts.”