A Senate bill that would allow juries to hear all relevant evidence in enhanced injury product-liability lawsuits was introduced on Tuesday, that would overturn a controversial 2001 Florida Supreme Court ruling.
In D'Amario v. Ford Motor Co., the court decided that juries could not hear the events leading up to an incident in an enhanced injuries case, or a case where injuries suffered were allegedly caused by a product defect, not just the original accident.
Since then, Ford has fought against the ruling, arguing that juries that are sophisticated enough to decide cases involving capital offenses should be able to hear all the facts pertaining to a case. Trial lawyers, seeking to hold up the law in its current interpretation, have argued that hearing evidence surrounding the initial accident in a case would unnecessarily bias the jury.
Senate Bill 142, brought by Sen. Garrett Richter, R-Naples, would reverse the D'Amario decision, altering Florida's "crashworthiness" doctrine.
"All this bill does is it permits a jury to hear all the facts," Richter said.
Amendments added Tuesday by Sen. David Simmons, R-Maitland, allowed for judges to thoroughly instruct juries about how to determine the amount of fault for each party in enhanced injury cases.
"It does not change the crashworthiness doctrine, it changes the information coming into the crashworthiness doctrine. This permits the judge to look at each case on a case-by-case basis," Simmons said.
Simmons called his amendment a compromise measure, but opponents of the bill don't appear to be swayed by it. They contend that if the current law is changed, Florida taxpayers will then be on the hook for a larger share of medical bills currently paid by automobile manufacturers as the result of damages awarded in enhanced injury product liability cases.
Since the bill is retroactive, reversing the D'Amario case, critics say it will adversely affect pending cases.
"Cases in suit that haven't gone to trial would be subject to this," said Paul Jess, deputy executive director of the Florida Justice Association, a trial lawyer advocacy group.
Sen. Ronda Storms, R-Valrico, worried that juries in some enhanced injury cases, like those involving a drunk driver, could be biased by the events leading up to the accident, and urged Simmons to require judges to instruct juries about the apportionment of guilt in all enhanced injury cases.
"Why did I not do that? Because of the value of compromise," Simmons said.
The bill is scheduled for a final vote in the Senate later this week.
--
Reach Gray Rohrer at grohrer@sunshinestatenews.com or at (850) 727-0859.