Donate
Email Password
Not a member? Sign Up   Forgot password?
Business and Economics Education Environment Health Care California
Home
About PRI
My PRI
Contact
Search
Policy Research Areas
Events
Publications
Press Room
PRI Blog
Jobs Internships
Scholars
Staff
Book Store
Policy Cast
Upcoming Events
WSJ's Stephen Moore Book Signing Luncheon-Rescheduled for December 17
12.17.2012 12:00:00 PM
Who's the Fairest of Them All?: The Truth About Opportunity, ... 
More

Recent Events
Victor Davis Hanson Orange County Luncheon December 5, 2012
12.5.2012 12:00:00 PM

Post Election: A Roadmap for America's Future

 More

Post Election Analysis with George F. Will & Special Award Presentation to Sal Khan of the Khan Academy
11.9.2012 6:00:00 PM

Pacific Research Institute Annual Gala Dinner

 More

Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts
10.19.2012 5:00:00 PM
Author Book Signing and Reception with U.S. Supreme Court Justice ... More

Opinion Journal Federation
Town Hall silver partner
Lawsuit abuse victims project
Press Archive
E-mail Print Legal Costs, Driving Out Economic Growth
ShopFloor.org News Clipping
By: Carter Wood
3.11.2008

ShopFloor.org, March 11, 2008


The Pacific Research Institute has just released its latest study on the civil litigation climates in each of the states, "U.S. Tort Liability Index: 2008 Report." Indexwise, good news for North Dakota, bad news for Florida.

The study takes a twofold approach toward assessing a state's tort climate -- its tort costs, hard numbers about monetary tort losses and litigation risks; and tort laws, that is, the element that reduce tort risks and costs.

Lawrence J. McQuillen, co-author of the report, explains why it matters: "In the competition for jobs and capital investment among the states, those states that suffer from high tort costs and litigiousness will continue to lose jobs and businesses to states with superior tort systems."

How do the states stack up?

 

  • Saints: States that have relatively low tort costs and/or few litigation risks and relatively strong tort rules on the books. These states are well positioned to contain their tort liability costs in the future if the rules are implemented as written. These states include Alaska, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee, and Utah.

 

  • Sinners: States that have relatively high tort costs and/or high litigation risks and relatively weak tort rules on the books. The sinners are likely to face high and rising tort liability costs in the future if lawsuit abuse continues unchecked. These states include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

 

  • Suckers: States that have weak tort rules on the books because they currently have relatively low tort costs and/or few litigation risks and, therefore, foolishly believe that they are not vulnerable and reform is not needed. These states include Hawaii, Iowa, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Virginia.

 

  • Salvageables: States that have moderate to high relative tort costs and/or moderate to high litigation risks, yet have moderate to strong tort rules, probably as a result of recent reforms. These states include Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Texas.

 


    To read the full report and more, please click here.

Related Link
Submit to: 
Submit to: Digg Submit to: Del.icio.us Submit to: Facebook Submit to: StumbleUpon Submit to: Newsvine Submit to: Reddit
Within Press
Browse by
Recent Publications
Press Archive
Powered by eResources