Florida’s new law targeting frivolous lawsuits and excessive damage claims in personal injury cases is being touted by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ staff as the greatest tort reform bill in Florida history.

Some personal injury lawyers, however, consider HB 837 one of the worst ideas the Legislature has had in a long time. That’s why civil attorneys in Southwest Florida and around the state rushed to get their cases filed before the bill became law.

Florida’s statewide E-filing Portal, which lawyers use to file lawsuits with the court electronically, saw a historic 280,122 new cases in February and March. The Florida Bar Association said the record number of filings was a reaction to the expected passage of the law, which reduces how much plaintiffs can win—and how much lawyers earn—in personal injury and negligence cases.

The tort reform law, which DeSantis signed March 24, targets what Florida Chamber President and CEO Mark Wilson called “billboard lawyers,” whose ads have become so ubiquitous that drivers involved in an accident on a Florida highway need only look up to see a law firm’s 800 number displayed on a billboard.

Billboards themselves aren’t the issue, of course, but to Wilson, the ads symbolize how widespread personal injury cases have become.

“This is about law firms gaming the system, suing people for $100,000 and they earn up to 40% in legal fees,” Wilson said as the Legislature debated the bill this spring. “That’s why the price of everything goes up—gasoline, food, auto insurance, homeowner insurance, construction, everything is more expensive because of the ‘lawsuit tsunami.’”

Though Wilson and other proponents say the bill helps consumers, personal injury lawyers and medical malpractice attorneys say the law greatly reduces what juries can award victims whose lives are destroyed through DUI crashes or other acts of negligence.

For instance, the new law:

• reduces the statute of limitations for general negligence cases from four years to two years;
• denies damages to the injured party when he or she is at least 51% liable in a negligence action;
• limits reimbursement for negligence-based medical claims to 140% of Medicare/Medicaid rate;
• repeals laws authorizing the recovery of one-way attorney fees in insurance cases; it also limits fee multipliers, which courts award lawyers when clients cannot find representation; and
• limits the introduction of evidence for medical damages at trial.

Richard L. Purtz, a partner for Goldstein, Buckley, Cechman, Rice & Purtz of Fort Myers, said the law protects insurance companies and big business.

“Our firm handles personal injury cases,” Purtz says. “This will have a negative effect on the rights of people who have been injured due to someone else’s negligence.”

Shorter statute of limitations

Reducing the statute of limitations to two years cuts in half the time for deposing witnesses, gathering evidence and negotiating with insurance companies and other defendants, Purtz said. The shorter timeline will increase, not decrease, the number of civil lawsuits.

“It takes time to negotiate a settlement with an insurance company,” he says. “If you can’t get it settled in two years, you have to file a lawsuit before the limitation takes effect.”

The 51% rule

A Lee County resident who sues another driver for injuries sustained in a car accident cannot collect any damages if that plaintiff is more than 51% at fault in that crash.

“Let’s say you leave your work today, you’re waiting at a stoplight in Naples, following the law, and a driver hits you at 50 mph,” says Frank Walker, vice president of governmental affairs for the Florida Chamber of Commerce. “It is not uncommon for lawyers to sue the injured party on behalf of the driver who caused the accident, it’s insane.”

Under the new law, if a jury finds the driver—or anyone in a negligence lawsuit—is 51% at fault, he or she cannot collect damages. Under previous rules, a plaintiff who is 40% at fault could collect 60% of the claim, depending on the number of plaintiffs.

Damages limited by Medicaid rates

The new law uses Medicare and Medicaid rates to determine what doctors who treat a severely injured, uninsured plaintiff can charge. For instance, reimbursement can be capped at 140% to 170% of the Medicaid rate, depending on the circumstance.

“This limits what can be used as evidence in medical costs to ridiculously low amounts,” Purtz says. “It goes way beyond what is reasonable; 1.7 times Medicaid for spinal surgery? That means specialists who do spinal surgery can only charge $600 for skilled surgery. There are only three spinal surgeons in Florida that accept Medicare/Medicaid rates. Plaintiffs who do not have enough medical insurance will have to go without medical care.”

Limits one-way fees, fee multipliers

In insurance cases, not counting declaratory judgment actions, plaintiffs can no longer collect attorney fees when they prevail against an insurance company. Now that insureds will have to pay for their lawyers, they are less likely to sue, and lawyers might be more likely to settle, Purtz said.

The bill also limits fee multipliers, which awards a lawyer higher hourly fees when the client can’t find someone to represent them.

“Fee multipliers were set up to ensure people could find attorneys for complex and difficult cases,” Walker says. “Hourly fees could be multiplied 500% to give lawyers an incentive to take the case.”

This part of the law has been a long time coming. Though fee multipliers were once a rare occurrence, they’ve become epidemic, Walker said.

In fact, Florida judges and reform-minded lawyers have sought a standard and reasonable fee multiplier for Florida for some time. A Third District Court of Appeal ruling cut one lawyer’s fee-multiplier-based fee from $284,000 to $142,000, saying the lawyer failed to prove it was difficult for the plaintiff to secure counsel.

Limits evidence for medical damages

To claim medical damages from a jury, plaintiffs will be limited to evidence of the amount actually paid. In other words, if a full medical bill for past services has been paid by an insurer, the actual amount paid by the insurer is the only amount admissible at trial.

Before the law was passed, doctors and the patient could present a bill to the jury that was much higher than the true cost of treatment.

“This bill requires transparency in damages,” Walker told Gulfshore Business. “Juries will use that lower amount to calculate the damages.”

How businesses take a hit

The new law allows the introduction of criminal activity—such as an assault, robbery or nightclub shooting—when people file security negligence cases. Wilson said juries will now weigh the criminal’s role in security negligence cases when a customer is injured during a holdup.

“It’s more than likely someone is going to sue the business,” Wilson says. “Could the business have done more? Is the alarm system working? A lot of the time, juries aren’t hearing about what the criminal did, how the criminal behaved—instead of what the business could have done to protect the customers and staff.”

Purtz, who sues negligent businesses on behalf of injured clients, said the introduction of criminal activity reduces the percentage of culpability assigned to the business. For instance, instead of the business owner being 100% at fault, a jury could determine the criminal is 80% at fault for causing a plaintiff’s injuries. But collecting damages from the criminal often isn’t feasible.

“Criminals can’t pay; they’re in jail,” Purtz says. “Juries can now compare the fault of the criminal with the fault of the business in negligence cases and it affects how much injured plaintiffs can recover.”