Three States Sign Medical Criteria Bills

June 6, 2006 - Following a host of other states who have already done the same, the governors of the states of South Carolina, Tennessee, and Kansas recently signed bills to enact laws that require plaintiffs to meet specific medical criteria in order to bring or pursue a silica- or asbestos-related lawsuit against a company or individual.

Lawmakers note that the new bills protect the rights of those who are truly sick with asbestos-related disease, allowing them to seek fair compensation.  At the same time, the bill protects the legal rights of workers who have been exposed to asbestos, but are not showing any impairment at this time. 

Many states have been prompted to go forward with such laws because asbestos legislation in the Senate has been stalled for quite so time, though Senators Specter and Leahy plan to reintroduce the proposed FAIR Act to fellow Senate members within the next few weeks. 

An article in the Insurance Journal notes that the Kansas bill “establishes reasonable medical standards to pursue a claim, requires a work and medical history, a diagnosis by a qualified physician, and recognized diagnostic tests.”  The bill also allows each asbestos case to be tried on its own merits, not as part of a "bundle" of claims that may include a few truly sick claimants and dozens of unimpaired claimants, notes the article.

The South Carolina law contains language that is very similar to that of the Kansas bill.  The Tennessee bill, however, currently addresses silica only, but state lawmakers hope it will soon be expanded to include asbestos regulations as well. 

Previously, Georgia, Florida, Texas, and Ohio passed similar resolutions outlining the medical criteria necessary in order to bring a lawsuit against a company for asbestos or silica exposure.

"These new laws support our effort to bring greater fairness to asbestos and silica litigation," said David Golden of the Property and Casualty Insurers Association of America. "These reforms will reduce the number of frivolous lawsuits, and prevent companies that did not produce asbestos or silica from being sued into bankruptcy. When states couple tort reforms that address issues such as joint and several liability and venue shopping along with these asbestos and silica medical criteria, such as Texas did, the abuse of the system can be dramatically reduced."