« Ind. Decisions - More on "Church’s admission of abuse not enough, accuser says" | Main | Environment - More on "Randolph County could zone 220,000 acres for CAFOs" »

Friday, December 28, 2007

Courts - "Ohio Supreme Court upholds cap on damages"

From a story by Kimball Perry in the Cincinnati Enquirer:

The Ohio Supreme Court upheld a state law Thursday that limits how much a person injured by a defective product can collect in pain-and-suffering damages - a nationally watched case that pitted an Anderson Township woman against a New Jersey drug company.

The law's authors said the case would help improve Ohio's reputation as a pro-business state.

But critics said the ruling would make it harder for ordinary Ohioans to hold big companies accountable. * * *

The majority opinion in the 5-2 ruling, written by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, said the Ohio law as revised did not violate the constitutional rights of injured parties to trial by jury, to a remedy for their injuries or to due process and equal protection. * * *

[Plaintiff] challenged the law change in court, saying a jury - not Ohio lawmakers - should determine how much someone should be awarded for pain and suffering and that the law that caps the monetary damages violates Ohio's law allowing a jury to hear the case.

The court ruled that the law that caps those damages doesn't violate citizens' rights to have the issues decided by a jury.

Ohio's "General Assembly is responsible for weighing those concerns and making policy decisions; we are charged with evaluating the constitutionality of their choices," Chief Justice Thomas Moyer wrote in the opinion. * * *

The case is being watched throughout the country because Ohio's law change that caps the "pain and suffering" damages is being considered by other states. Some already have adopted caps.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business Legal Foundation joined in urging the court to uphold the law.

Groups urging the court to overturn it included the Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers, the Ohio Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and Mothers Against Drunk Driving. * * *

In his dissent, Justice Paul Pfeifer blasted the majority.

"If the damage cap of $250,000 is constitutional, why can't the General Assembly limit damages for claims they do not favor to $100,000? Or $1,000? Or $10?" Pfeifer wrote. "Under this court's reasoning, there is nothing in the Ohio Constitution to restrain the General Assembly from limiting noneconomic damages to $1."

Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 28, 2007 08:04 AM
Posted to Courts in general