Florida Justice Reform Institute
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Meet the President
  • Legislative
    • On the Front Line
    • On The Front Line 2025
    • Achievements
    • 2025 Legislation
  • Appellate Work
  • FJRI in the News
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Member
    • The Committee for Florida Justice Reform
    • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Two Bills Could Put Patient Privacy in Danger

April 9, 2019/in Roundtable Politics

 

RoundTable Politics

Two Bills Could Put Patient Privacy in Danger

Jordan Kirkland – April 9th, 2019

With only a few weeks remaining in the legislative session, Florida lawmakers are looking at ramming through measures that could impact the Sunshine State for years to come.

One bill, if enacted, would further solidify the state’s unfortunate status as a “Judicial Hellhole.” 

SB 1700 by Senator Tom Lee and HB 1253 by Representative Amber Mariano could have an adverse effect on the state. making patient’s private information public during litigation. 

According to the American Tort Reform Association, “these proposals are intended to support the Attorney General’s lawsuit against opioid manufacturers, distributors and pharmacies.  There will be, however, regrettable consequences for consumers. As William Large of the Florida Justice Reform Institute testified on the proposals, if the bills are enacted, private data of individual consumers in the Prescription Drug Monitoring Database (PDMP) likely will be made public in litigation. The PDMP was established to guard against individuals going to multiple providers for the same medication, and it was never intended for use as a data repository for litigation. Florida would become an outlier as the only state to allow this disclosure of consumer data.”

Florida

While the opioid crisis is without question a top priority for Attorney General Ashley Moody and the entire administration, there are major concerns surrounding lawsuits that have been filed in Florida and all around the country.

Below are some of these concerns outlined by ATRA.

1.  Prescription opioids, like all pharmaceuticals, are regulated throughout the supply chain – from FDA approval, to the process for prescribing, through distribution and ultimately sale  to the consumer. But will litigation “solve” the opioid addiction crisis? 

2.  A recent investigation by the Washington Post revealed that much of the problem the nation faces is actually illegal fentanyl, and the NIH reports that nearly twice as many opioid related deaths in Florida involve fentanyl rather than those that require prescriptions. However, the scourge of synthetic opioids is not addressed in the civil litigation.

3.  For nearly a generation, state and local governments have hired personal injury lawyers on a contingency basis to sue entire industries. And while public officials are required to serve the interests of the public, the motivation of contingency fee lawyers is to maximize economic recoveries – and their fees. These competing priorities can lead to corruption or worse, as we’ve seen in Texas.

4.  Health advocates will point to the 1998 national tobacco settlement as a roadmap for the states regarding opioids. But a fundamental question must be, “Where does the money go?” A recent analysis of the tobacco litigation revealed that a mere 2% of the funds Texas received in 2016 went to anti-smoking efforts. Oklahoma’s recent $270 million settlement with Purdue directs $12.5 million of that amount to local governments. The state’s lawyers are expected to receive nearly five times the amount going to localities. 

  1. ATRA testified before the Florida House Civil Justice Subcommittee this legislative session on why the state is cited in our Judicial Hellholes report and recommended steps for Florida to take in order to be removed from the list. If successful, the enactment of both measures would be a significant step in the wrong direction. Moreover, it will diminish the privacy rights of consumers, while enriching the pockets of personal injury lawyers.

https://www.roundtablepolitics.com/two-bills-could-put-patient-privacy-in-danger.html 

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2019-04-09 15:59:402024-12-11 18:00:08Two Bills Could Put Patient Privacy in Danger
Florida Justice Reform Institute

AOB lawsuits outpacing population growth

March 27, 2019/in CQ Roll Call, Daily Commerical, Florida Politics, Roundtable Politics

 

Fla Pol

Insurance Agents AOB Reform

AOB lawsuits outpacing population growth

Florida is growing fast. AOB lawsuits are growing faster.

By Drew Wilson on March 27, 2019

Florida is growing fast.

The state is already the third-largest in the union and recent research from the Florida Chamber of Commerce estimates 1,100 people move to the Sunshine State every day — that’s amounts to 5 million new residents by 2030.

But another statewide metric is accelerating faster: assignment of benefits lawsuits.

“While Florida is a growth state, AOB lawsuits are growing much faster than population, going from little more than a few hundredths of a point as a fraction of Florida’s population to nearly a full three-quarters of a percent now,” said Capital City Consulting lobbyist and FJRI counsel Ashley Kalifeh.

AOB is a process where policyholders sign over their insurance benefits for a quick repair after their property — be it a home, car windshield or something else — is damaged.

The contractor or attorney who receives those benefits often attempts to collect a payout from insurers in court. AOB reform advocates say those lawsuits lead to inflated payouts which in turn drive the cost of insurance premiums for all Floridians.

According to the Florida Justice Reform Institute, AOB lawsuits made up more than half of all lawsuits filed in Florida in 2018 — the eighth year in a row they’ve held the majority.

Additionally, the quantity seen 18 percent growth year-over-year.

A report produced by Kalifeh shows AOB suits increased by over 900 percent between 2008 and 2018. Total lawsuits increased by a little over 400 percent during the same stretch.

“Unfortunately, rampant AOB lawsuits threaten our confidence in the state’s legal climate,” said FJRI President William Large. “The legislature can help the people of Florida by standing up to the trial lawyers and passing meaningful AOB lawsuit reform.”

“This updated report details how out-of-control AOB lawsuits based on the one-way attorney fee continues to accelerate, driving up overall litigation and costs for policyholders.”

The report also found that about 85 percent of those suits were filed by nine law firms. Just one attorney — Gregory Gudin of Landau & Associates — filed more than 30,000 AOB lawsuits last year.

Most of those suits were filed in a handful of counties, too. Miami-Dade and Broward accounted for nearly half of property AOB suits, while Hillsborough County alone was home to more than 50 percent of auto glass AOB suits.

FJRI supports measures moving through the House and Senate that would make changes to AOB rules.

Among those reforms is an end to one-way attorney’s fees in AOB cases. Currently, the losing side of an AOB case has to cover the attorney’s fees for the prevailing party.

Opponents of the reforms say AOB suits would slow down if insurance companies green lit repairs faster and used higher quality contractors, especially in the case of water damage.

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/291981-aob-lawsuits-outpacing-population-growth

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2019-03-27 15:56:102024-11-25 20:36:24AOB lawsuits outpacing population growth
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Beware: Trial Attorney Ads Are Dangerous Prescriptions

October 23, 2018/in Roundtable Politics

 

RoundTable Politics

Beware: Trial Attorney Ads Are Dangerous Prescriptions

Judge Drugs

William Large – October 24th, 2018

“Have you been affected by medication or witnessed life-threatening side effects from it? If so, contact a lawyer now.” These words echo in our minds as the advertisements flash across our televisions, interrupting our shows again and again. What many consumers don’t realize is that these ads recruit people into thinking all their problems will be solved with a lawsuit.

The production commences when lawyers pay for those television ads asking if you have been injured from prescribed medication or surgery, or maybe just think some other health problem you have could be blamed on it. From there, they recruit a class of clients and file a class action lawsuit.

But that’s not the worst part: imagine if your mother or grandmother decided to stop taking their prescribed medication because a lawyer’s ad on television frightened them into doing just that with outrageous and inflammatory hints and allegations.

But we don’t have to imagine it, because it’s happening right now. A recent study by Public Opinion Strategies found that one out of four respondents who viewed a trial lawyer ad accusing a medication of being dangerous said they would immediately stop taking their medicine without consulting a doctor.

Florida has long been in the eye of the lawyer-advertising hurricane. In a recent study conducted by the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA), the Tampa-St. Petersburg and Miami-Fort Lauderdale media markets saw a large rate of legal service-related advertising in April through June of this year.

In the nearly two million homes in Tampa and St. Petersburg, lawyers, law firms and other legal services firms spent an estimated $4.7 million to broadcast 58,000 ads. For those not doing the math, that totals to an average of 630 ads every day or, to paint an even more alarming picture, one ad every two minutes from April through June. Meanwhile, in the pricier Miami-Fort Lauderdale media market, lawyers spent $4.9 million to broadcast 33,000 local legal service ads. To put it in perspective, there were ten times as many legal television ads as there were pizza delivery and restaurant commercials.

In many cases, these ads undermine the simple notion that physicians and health care providers, and not lawyers, should be the source of medical advice. For instance, legal service ads should not be presented as medical, health, or consumer alerts. In fact, these ads should instead make very clear that a person should not stop taking prescribed, FDA-approved medication unless instructed to do so by their doctor.

Patients should not be discouraged from taking vital medications without consulting their doctor. Drug lawsuit ads only serve to drive a wedge between doctors and their patients who have been led to believe the drugs are dangerous. Freedom of commercial speech should not place patients at risk. In sum, television lawsuit advertising should not become a form of medical advice.

William Large is the president of the Florida Justice Reform Institute.

The dedicated president of our lobbying organization in Tallahassee, FL

https://www.roundtablepolitics.com/beware-trial-attorney-ads-are-dangerous-prescriptions.html#.W9CodBhvtfk.twitter

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2018-10-23 15:56:172024-12-11 17:59:03Beware: Trial Attorney Ads Are Dangerous Prescriptions
Florida Justice Reform Institute

No-fault insurer prevails in attempted class action over Medicare reimbursement

September 26, 2018/in Capitol News Service, CQ Roll Call, Daily Commerical, FlaNewsOnline, Florida Politics, Florida Trend, Florida Watchdog, Orlando Political Observer, Roundtable Politics, Tallahasssee Reports, wctv.tv

 

Florida Politics

No-fault insurer prevails in attempted class action over Medicare reimbursement

Michael Moline – September 26, 2018

A state appeals court has rejected a class action filed by a Medicare Advantage organization seeking double reimbursements for its costs of providing care that should have been covered by a no-fault auto insurer.

In a unanimous ruling, the 3rd District Court of Appeal said such organizations would have to establish each claim separately against Ocean Harbor Casualty Insurance.

The court overruled Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Samantha Ruiz-Cohen, who had certified a class potentially including 37 Florida Medicare Advantage organizations, or MROs.

The lead plaintiff was an entity called MSPA, an assignee of the defunct MRO Florida Healthcare Plus Inc.

“Proof that certain medical bills paid by MSPA’s alleged assignor should have been paid by Ocean Harbor as a primary payer will not establish that other medical bills paid by a different MAO should also have been paid by Ocean Harbor as a primary payer,” Judge Thomas Logue wrote.

“To the contrary, proof to establish liability will necessarily devolve into a series of mini-trials under Florida no-fault law … which precludes a finding of predominance and renders this case inappropriate for class action treatment,” Logue wrote.

“Accordingly, we reverse the provisions of the certification order under review in conflict with this opinion.”

MAOs are private companies that contract with Medicare to provide coverage at a flat rate per enrollee. They profit to the degree they provide the required coverage for less than the flat rate.

The coverage is meant to be secondary to other, primary, coverage, including personal injury protection policies.

Miami plaintiffs’ attorney John Ruiz argued that he could establish the common claims necessary to sustain a class action using an algorithm that analyzes police reports of accidents and other records that Ocean Harbor must report under state and federal law.

He argued that Ocean Harbor’s obligation to pay was automatic once his client established that it had made payments reimbursable by the insurer.

The 3rd DCA disagreed.

“We reject the notion that MSPA claims reimbursement rights are not governed by Florida law relating to the recovery of benefits under a PIP policy, and are therefore automatic,” Logue wrote.

“Instead, MSPA must demonstrate that, in addition to any requirements of federal law, Ocean Harbor was required to make the payment in the first instance under Florida no-fault law for each reimbursement it claims.”

William Large, president of the tort-reformer Florida Justice Reform Institute, praised the outcome.

“The plaintiff has filed dozens of copycat cases against Florida insurers raising the same claims — this case was simply the first to reach the class certification stage,” Large said in a written statement.

“In certifying the class, the trial court failed to rigorously apply Florida’s class action certification requirements, which are necessary to protect defendants’ due process rights. The 3rd DCA recognized this overreach and ruled appropriately.”

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/275876-no-fault-insurer-prevails-in-attempted-class-action-over-medicare-reimbursement 

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2018-09-26 15:58:282024-11-25 22:22:42No-fault insurer prevails in attempted class action over Medicare reimbursement
Search Search

FJRI News Categories

FJRI News Archive

Florida Justice Reform Institute

Florida Justice Reform Institute

  • Phone

    (850) 222-0170

  • Hours of Operation

    Monday – Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

  • Address

    210 S Monroe Street
    Tallahassee, FL 32301

Site Links

  • The Committee for Florida Justice Reform
  • About
  • Legislative
  • Appellate Work
  • FJRI in the News
  • Get Involved
© 2025 Florida Justice Reform Institute, All Rights Reserved. | Website Hosting & Web Development by RAD TECH
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to X
  • Link to LinkedIn
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top