At first blush, Connecticut's 24th-place finish in the American Justice Partnership's rankings of tort-law-liability climate would seem to be welcome news. Finishing in the middle of the pack nationally on this issue ordinarily would seem uplifting for the state's private sector, which has grown weary watching the trial bar siphon money out of the economy that otherwise might have been spent to expand businesses, create jobs, raise employees' salaries or improve their fringe benefits, research new products or reward investors.
But writing in the most recent issue of Directorship magazine, AJP Chairman Steven B. Hantler warns all is not rosy in Connecticut. The Pacific Research Institute's 2006 U.S. Tort Liability Index, a peer-reviewed analysis used in the AJP rankings, linked Connecticut's lagging economy, job market and business investments to its high tort-law costs and government's inability to enact legal reforms to reduce lawsuit abuses. Connecticut finished ahead of just six states in the all-important PRI index. The state may have enacted some liability reforms 20 years ago, Mr. Hantler wrote, but the absence of reasonable limits on non-economic damages is discouraging economic growth and job creation.
The state's low rankings should concern everyone because they influence corporate decisions on where to do business, and where to expand or contract. When states such as Connecticut have demonstrably hostile legal environments, corporations are encouraged to bypass them or move to friendlier legal climes and take their jobs with them.
But Connecticut has at least two other factors working against it: high taxes, and according to Mr. Hantler, "activist Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who along with former New York Attorney General (now Governor) Eliot Spitzer, has led the movement for regulation through litigation."
Consequently, "Connecticut's liability climate may be trending downward." That's very bad news for everyone except Mr. Blumenthal and the trial bar.
