Provides relative to certain civil actions, civil liability, damages, and procedures. (1/1/21) (OR SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Impact
The passage of SB 29 will have significant implications for how civil liability is approached in Louisiana courts. By lowering the threshold for jury trials, it could lead to an increase in the number of cases being tried by jury, thereby changing the dynamics of litigation within the state. Additionally, the bill introduces a provision regarding the disclosure of paid medical expenses during trials. Specifically, it states that juries shall only be informed of the amounts billed by medical providers, which could influence the perceptions of liability and damages awarded in medical malpractice cases.
Summary
Senate Bill 29, introduced by Senator McMath, seeks to amend various provisions of civil liability laws in Louisiana, notably adjusting the threshold for jury trials in civil cases. The bill lowers the monetary limit for cases eligible for a jury trial from $50,000 to $25,000, while maintaining an exception for certain cases where the amount exceeds $10,000 if a cash deposit is made. This change aims to make legal recourse more accessible for lower-value civil claims, which supporters argue will benefit individuals seeking justice in civil disputes.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 29 was mixed. Proponents, including several legal advocates and legislators, expressed that the bill would streamline the judicial process for minor claims and ensure that litigants are not negatively impacted by high litigation costs. However, critics argued that changing the threshold could undermine the seriousness of cases with higher stakes and suggested that it might encourage frivolous lawsuits, thereby complicating court processes. Overall, the discussions highlighted the balancing act between accessibility to justice and maintaining constructive judicial procedures.
Contention
One notable contention related to SB 29 was around the provision forbidding the jury from knowing whether a claimant's medical expenses had been covered by insurance, keeping that information hidden from deliberation. Advocates of this section argue that it allows juries to focus solely on the medical treatments received without biases about payments made, while opponents believe it could lead to jurors underestimating the true costs of care incurred by claimants, potentially affecting damage awards unfairly. Furthermore, the proposed changes to existing laws about comparative negligence regarding seatbelt use have also been a point of debate among lawmakers.
Provides for recoverable medical expenses, limitation upon jury trials and admissibility of evidence in civil actions. (8/1/25) (OR INCREASE LF EX See Note)