from Cres Vellucci I wish people - rather than get confused by the legalese and thus vote no on ballot measures, or not vote at all – would simply look to see who supports, or opposes, the proposition. In the case of Prop 46, insurance companies - ever the consumers friend (note sarcasm) - oppose it. That should tell us how we should vote - the opposite of how our friends in the insurance industry (which is spending millions to defeat 46) want us to vote. What is missing in this analysis is that Prop. 46 raises the maximum on malpractice suits to what it should be had the $250,000 limit been adjusted for inflation (CPI) since 1975. Right now, it takes about $100,000 to file a suit (lawyers must pay experts, etc.) with the hope of winning and maybe getting the maximum of $250,000. So it takes a very good case to make it worth the while for lawyers to take these cases on a contingency basis and pay those costs up front. When I was grossly misdiagnosed in 2010 at the VA (I was having stroke symptoms - slurred speech, blackouts and BP of 240 over 190) and had a full stroke hours later after they sent me home, I had a good suit, but I didnt die and I wasnt totally disabled, so my damages were minimal. Thus, even with all the lawyers I know and work with, I could not sue. If I were wealthy I would have sued anyway. But, like most Americans, I dont have the resources so the doctor went unpunished and I went uncompensated for my pain and suffering. Prop. 46 would correct that.
Posted on: Sun, 05 Oct 2014 20:27:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015