A Pennsylvania legal reform group is urging voters to oppose a bill that would for the first time allow plaintiff lawyers to suggest dollar amounts jurors should award as damages in civil trials, a practice called “anchoring” that critics say can lead to excessive “nuclear verdicts.”
House Bill 1913 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on June 8 on a 14-12 vote divided on party lines. The bill’s chief sponsor, Democratic Rep. Tim Brennan, is a workers’ compensation attorney.
The bill would amend civil trial rules to allow plaintiff lawyers to argue how much money their clients should receive for actual damages as well as for pain and suffering. Defense lawyers could argue for lower amounts, but the Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform said the change would allow plaintiff lawyers to “anchor” dollar amounts in jurors’ minds and lead them to award far higher verdicts than they would reach based on evidence alone.
“Anchoring tactics include suggesting a huge financial sum or a mathematical formula (an amount per day or per hour) designed to lead to outrageous nuclear verdicts (and huge paydays for plaintiffs’ attorneys),” the group said.
Pennsylvania is one of the few states that do not allow jurors to hear such arguments, instead requiring them to come up with their own calculation of damages based on evidence presented.
The bill’s sponsors say the current system “can lead to unfair results and is not in keeping with the traditional adversarial practice of American law.”
The bill would allow lawyers to specifically argue to the jury “in lump sums or by mathematical formula the amount the attorney considers to be an appropriate award” for actual and psychological damages. The defense could argue for a lower amount. The jury would be instructed the suggested amounts are arguments, not evidence, and it’s still up to the jury to determine damages.
The Coalition for Civil Justice Reform said the bill would make it easier for plaintiff lawyers to suggest dollar amounts per day that can add up to staggering sums.
“The growing trend of nuclear verdicts is already having a negative impact on our state and is a leading cause of our continuous ranking as one of the country’s worst judicial hellholes,” the group said. “House Bill 1913 will only exacerbate this problem.”
