Florida sees a wave of lawsuits filed in advance of its landmark tort reform legislation going into effect, the closely watched Grieving Families Act is vetoed in New York, and medical cannabis is legalized in Kentucky.
Texas
Bills Would Allow for Remote Hearings
A pair of bills introduced would allow the Division of Workers’ Compensation to conduct certain workers’ compensation hearings remotely. H.B. 4214 states, “On mutual agreement of the parties, the division shall conduct a contested hearing telephonically or by videoconference.” S.B. 1640, meanwhile, pertains to cases in which the insurance carrier is the State Office of Risk Management, the Texas A&M University System, the Department of Transportation, or the University of Texas System. The bill says the division “shall conduct” a remote contested case hearing if those carriers show that doing so remotely “would reduce the costs incurred by this state, including in employee time, resulting from travel to and from the hearing location.” Current law stipulates a contested case hearing must be conducted at a site no more than 75 miles from the claimant’s residence at the time of the injury.—From Senior Managing Editor Phil Gusman
Kentucky
Governor Signs Medical Cannabis Law
Gov. Andy Beshear signed SB 47, which legalizes medical cannabis in the state. According to Beshear, the bill creates a structure to regulate the medical cannabis program, including dispensaries, cultivators, practitioners, processors, products, and the issuing of identification cards to patients and caregivers. It also establishes the authorization process for practitioners to recommend the use of medicinal cannabis and establishes the cannabis business license application process and requirements. The bill passed the Senate by a 26-11 vote on March 16 and passed the House by a 66-33 vote on March 30 before being signed by Beshear on March 31. Beshear says, “In November, I signed an executive order to help Kentuckians with certain medical conditions, like our veterans suffering from PTSD, find safe and effective relief through medical cannabis. Now, I am finally able to sign this legislation into law and fully legalize medical cannabis—something the majority of Kentuckians support.”—From Senior Managing Editor Phil Gusman
Florida
Flood of Lawsuits Filed in Advance of Tort Reform Law
Insurers and defense attorneys warned about a deluge of lawsuits filed by plaintiffs’ attorneys in the days leading up to Gov. Ron DeSantis’ signing a landmark tort reform bill on March 24. The bill, effective immediately, generated an onslaught of insurance claims lawsuits filed by plaintiffs’ law firms to “beat the clock” before the new restrictive statutes became law. According to a statewide court registry, 90,593 circuit civil cases were filed between March 17 and March 22. That accounts for 77% of the 118,179 cases filed between Jan. 1 and March 22 in Florida. Orlando-based law firm Morgan & Morgan boasted about filing 25,000 to “beat the deadline.” The new law reduces from four years to two years a statute of limitations for filing negligence lawsuits and largely eliminates one-way attorney’s fees that insurers can be mandated to pay to cover the costs of plaintiffs’ lawyers. Additionally, it mostly eliminates attorney’s fee multipliers that courts have broad discretion to tack on to verdicts favoring claimants.—From Mark Friedlander, Insurance Information Institute
Washington, D.C.
Challenge to EPA Emissions Rule Denied
The District of Columbia Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the EPA’s Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Update Rule over objections that it was “arbitrary and capricious,” and that the EPA failed to conduct an appropriate assessment under the Clean Air Act. The rule requires power plants and other high-emitting machinery to install emission-reduction equipment and update pollution controls. At issue was whether the EPA had properly followed the relevant rule-making process in light of a competing testing model showing that emission levels did not meet the standards for EPA involvement. The D.C. Circuit affirmed the rule, finding that executive agency determinations based upon “highly complex and technical matters” are “entitled to great deference” because courts lack the expertise necessary to oversee such actions, and policy choices are more correctly made by a “politically accountable branch of the government.”—From CLM Member Todd Thacker, Goldberg Segalla
Pennsylvania
Employer Responsible for Cannabis Treatment
Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court reversed previous rulings and held an employee was entitled to be reimbursed for medical marijuana as recommended by his physician. Paul Sheetz was injured in 1977 while working for Firestone Tire & Rubber and received continuing medical reimbursement from his employer. He began receiving recommendations for medical marijuana in January 2019, but his former employer refused to pay for it, prompting Sheetz to file a workers’ compensation appeal. The Commonwealth Court distinguished between “coverage” and “reimbursement,” finding that while Firestone could not be compelled to provide insurance coverage under the Medical Marijuana Act (MMA), that act also states that an employee could not be denied a “right or privilege” based on medical marijuana use. It was noted that several states had specifically excluded the word “reimbursement” from their statutes and Pennsylvania’s failure to do so must be inferred as reflecting an intention that the MMA does not intend to exclude an insurer’s reimbursement obligations.—From CLM Member William F. McDevitt, Wilson Elser
New York
Grieving Families Act Vetoed
Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed Senate Bill S74A, also known as the “Grieving Families Act.” Despite heavy pressure from the plaintiff’s bar and others, Hochul expressed concern about the potential negative impact of the bill on the economy as well as health care costs. The bill would have significantly expanded the availability of compensable damages in wrongful-death actions by expanding the definition of who constitutes a family member to include “close family members,” such as spouses, domestic partners, children, parents, grandparents, stepparents, and siblings. In addition, plaintiffs would have had the ability to recover for grief, sympathy, and loss of consortium, whereas currently they may only recover economic damages. Further, it would have applied retroactively to all currently pending wrongful death cases. Hochul did, however, encourage the legislature to update the current statute without such a big blow to small businesses, insurance companies, and individuals impacted by higher health care costs.—From CLM Member Tracy J. Abatemarco, Wood Smith Henning & Berman