Another important article today not available online is one from the Wall Street Journal on medical malpractice, headlined "As Malpractice Caps Spread, Lawyers Turn Away Some Cases: Limits on Awards for Suffering Create New Impediments; Insurers Defend Changes." This piece makes a strong case that "the cap on noneconomic damages [present in many state laws] is a violation of the country's equal protection laws."
The Journal writes that: "caps on damages for pain and suffering, or so-called noneconomic caps --[are] turning out to have the unpublicized effect of creating two tiers of malpractice victims. Cases involving high earners or big medical bills move ahead. Lawyers can still seek economic damages for the wages these patients lost or to pay for continuing medical bills. But lawyers are turning away cases involving victims that don't represent big economic losses -- most notably retired people, children and housewives ...."
Indiana's law (please correct me if I'm wrong) does not make that distinction. See the limits set out in IC 34-18-14-3:
(a) The total amount recoverable for an injury or death of a patient may not exceed the following:Posted by Marcia Oddi at October 8, 2004 12:16 PM(1) Five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for an act of malpractice that occurs before January 1, 1990.
(2) Seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) for an act of malpractice that occurs:
(A) after December 31, 1989; and(3) One million two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000) for an act of malpractice that occurs after June 30, 1999.(B) before July 1, 1999.