There's an old saying: What's in BUSINESS WEEK, especially if it's packaged as a cover story, is already so old news. So, I guess I shouldn't get all worked up about the January 8th cover story "How Business Trounced The Trial Lawyers." As the title suggests, the feature article says that the class-action litigation movement has been derailed, jurors don't like funny-money awards, and since the game has migrated to the state level, where lobbyists can have more focus and control, real tort reform is happening.
Actually, a few months ago I posted some of this supposed scoop in terms of control over litigation flowing to the states and that's why, I opioned, it was so smart of the former lead paint companies to put their focus on the Ohio legislature. That may well pay off. The bill - Substitute Senate Bill 117 - which passed both the OH House and Senate would prohibit the extension of the public nuisance law in the state to what some consider as really product-liability cases. The bill is on OH Governor Bob Taft's desk. The good news is that he hasn't vetoed it, at least not yet. Today, James Nash of THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH reports that Governor Taft is still reviewing it.
And, now that I'm giving all this state focus more thought, it might just be why Motley Rice is taking such an aggressive stance in OH. Six OH cities have now been recruited to sue the former lead-paint companies including home boy Sherwin-Williams. According to media coverage, Motley Rice has been involved in much of this and will get paid on a contingency basis. If Michael Orey, who wrote the BW article is correct, this could be Motley Rice's last stand.
Think about it: The brilliant defense lawyers representing Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries and Millennium Holdings in Rhode Island have so many options that it could be years before the state receives a penny and Motley Rice receives any of its 16+ percent contingency fee. And if the defense decides to opt for a separate abatement trial in RI, the state and Motley Rice might get nothing since there's no evidence of any activity by any of the defendants in RI per se.
There's more. The now commonsensical Jerry Brown in California could as the new Attorney General discourage the counties from pressing their lead-paint suits and encourage them to form partnerships for lead abatement. That leaves lead paint litigation in Wisconsin, New Jersey and Missouri, none of which have been active volcanos lately.
So, in terms of the lead paint follies, BW might be right, although the piece doesn't mention this bit of tort per se. However, I have to wonder if optimism is deserved about tort reform more generally. Sure there might be a reduction in the number of suits and caps on awards. But, the plaintiff bar has tasted blood in terms of novel legal theory. I predict much more creativity.
But, I'm only a public affairs professional. I got emails and calls out to all the brandname attorneys, both plaintiff and defense, who've shared their points of view over the past 14 months. I'm waiting for their comments. Your opinions, on or off the record, are also very much welcome.
Happy 2007 and many billable hours to all, including to my public relations boutique.
That's a big if.