<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>InsuranceSpecialists Blog &#187; medical malpractice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog/tag/medical-malpractice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog</link>
	<description>your source for insurance information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:01:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Missouri Court Issues Ruling in Medical Malpractice Case</title>
		<link>http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog/2010/03/25/missouri-court-issues-ruling-in-medical-malpractice-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog/2010/03/25/missouri-court-issues-ruling-in-medical-malpractice-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Iris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missouri]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog/?p=109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two days ago, the Missouri Supreme Court made a ruling that narrowed the scope of a 2005 state law that limits the amount of money that may be awarded in medical malpractice cases has slightly narrowed the scope of a 2005 state law limiting how much money can be awarded to people in medical malpractice [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two days ago, the Missouri Supreme Court  made a ruling that narrowed the scope of a 2005 state law that limits the amount of money that may be awarded in medical malpractice cases  has slightly narrowed the scope of a 2005 state law limiting how much money can be awarded to people in medical malpractice cases, however, it&#8217;s only a partial victory. While the ruling on March 23 did give a victory to people who were injured prior to 2005, it did not address the larger issue of whether or not the lawsuit limits violate other constitutional rights. </p>
<p>The originaly 2005 &#8220;tort reform&#8221; law was a priority for then-Governor Matt Blunt and his largely Republican-led state legislature, who said limiting payouts would also limit liability insurance premiums for doctors, helping to ensure that<a href="http://www.insurancespecialists.com/industry-articles/association-plans/"> healthcare in Missouri</a> remained available and affordable. One of that law&#8217;s main provisions reduced the cap for non-economic damages such as pain and suffering to a flat $350,000 per medical malpractice lawsuit. That limit became effective for any suit filed after August 28, 2005, and represented a significant decrease over the previous limit of $579,000, which had been adjusted for inflation each year, and was assumed to apply to multiple parties in a given lawsuit. </p>
<p>The case at the center of the issue was that of James and Mary Klotz of St. Louis. In 2006, they filed a lawsuit alleging that James Klotz had contracted a staph infection which subsequently led to additional health problems, during the implantation of a pacemaker in March, 2004. At the time, a jury awarded James more than $2 million, and also awarded more than $500,000 to Mary, with more than half of their combined total comprised of non-economic damages. However, a trial judge later reduced James&#8217; non-economic damages to the the 2005-imposed cap, and eliminated them completely from monies awarded to Mary, because the same law required that they be counted under her husband&#8217;s total. </p>
<p>The Missouri Supreme Court sad the state&#8217;s constitution includes a prohibition on retroactive laws, which means the Klotzes -and anyone else whose injuries occurred before the 2005 law took effect &#8211; cannot be held to those caps. That decision means that the Klotzes will receive hundreds of thousands more dollars. </p>
<p>In an interview with the <a href="http://associatedpress.com/">Associated Press</a>, James Klotz said, &#8220;I&#8217;m glad I won, but I&#8217;m in pain all the time. I&#8217;d gladly give up all the money just to have my whole life back together.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.insurancespecialists.com/blog/2010/03/25/missouri-court-issues-ruling-in-medical-malpractice-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

