The Government May Limit Unwarranted Asbestos Claims With New Legislature
In a recent hearing at the state affairs committee the question arose of what role the legislature should take, if any, in regards to silica and asbestos lawsuits.A freshman house member, who is also a physician, has written a senate bill. This bill is the darling of business interests who are petitioning the legislature to reduce the number of claims. They say these cases are bogging down the entire system. Personal injury lawyers are simply greedy trial lawyers, according tho business groups. They exploit victims with the help of unscrupulous doctors who misread x rays.They also believe that businesses are being stressed too much by the costs of trying to defend themselves from fraudulent claims.
The attorneys who work as representation for the workers indicate there is little or no need for legislative action, and point to the changes made in tort law to restructure asbestos cases to an individual judge in a given state.Despite these changes, many doubtful claims have still managed to appear on the court dockets, while other attorneys have begun using silica exposure as a basis for the next round of claims.Get more help on the topic of personal injury solicitors.
Companies that have been plagued by these claims have long argued that an easy way to separate valid claims from fraudulent ones would be a requirement that the plaintiffs show actual physical side-effects from the exposure rather than simply displaying an x-ray.The proposed bill would ask claimants to meet rigid medical standards prior to filing. They’d have an x ray, breathing test and doctor’s exam.
If workers have been exposed, but can’t show damage yet, they will be protected under the bill, as well.First, the two year statute of limitations for exposure cases would be put on hold.Workers may be blocked from making a claim and later develop symptoms that are severe enough to warrant a case being brought against their employer or former employer. This would give them time to make a case.Insurance companies could not deny coverage to workers who had been harmfully exposed to asbestos in the past.
Many of these important safeguards are there to protect people, but some believe these medical standards are simply too strict.One suggestion is to keep the current standards for determining whether a worker can sue, but to have a judge review the claim first to determine if there is a valid medical claim.The intent of the bill is not to curb the rights of workers, but is instead to cut back on the wasteful claims that flood the courts.Further resources about melbourne personal injury lawyers are located there.
One opponent pointed out that if physicians are just lying in order to participate in fraudulent claims, then no bill in the world can fix that problem. The bottom line is doctors won’t be stopped from lying to a higher standard because of this bill.Whatever their motives are, clearly the state has an interest in ridding itself of false claims so that the justice system can work more efficiently.Employees who’ve been exposed and who have a real claim should get relief as soon as possible. While the proposed legislative amendment affects only the bill before the house, its proponent also recommends that the senate debate the measure as well.
Tags: claim, law, Lawyers, legal, Personal Injury