Tort reform actions at statehouses impact trucking industry

Tort reform pursuits at statehouses around the country that are of interest to the trucking industry are providing a mixed bag of results.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association advocates for reform to civil liability rules to reduce lawsuit abuse around the nation. OOIDA contends that plaintiff’s lawyers constantly grow more aggressive with theories and arguments, trying to reach into the pockets of truck drivers who often bear little-to-no fault for an unfortunate incident.

Georgia

The state of Georgia enacted a comprehensive tort reform package that covers phantom damages, anchoring, bifurcated trials, seat-belt use and third-party litigation financing.

The new rules are billed as leveling the playing field in Georgia’s courtrooms.

Gov. Brian Kemp previously said that Georgia’s legal environment was draining bank accounts and hurting job creators of all sizes. He included trucking operations among the industries that would benefit from tort reform.

SB 68 and 69 put job creators and hardworking Georgians first by leveling the playing field in our courtrooms and ensuring Georgia remains the best place to live, work, and raise a family. Today I’m proud to sign these bills into law! pic.twitter.com/H6lpbwwZLh

— Governor Brian P. Kemp (@GovKemp) April 21, 2025

Arkansas

A new Arkansas law is described as restoring fairness and transparency in the state’s judicial system. The new rule limits “phantom damages.”

Plaintiffs in the state had been able to seek the full amount charged by a medical provider. There was no adjustment if the insurance company negotiated a lesser amount to be paid.

The rule change is described as permitting plaintiffs to recover only what insurance companies have paid for medical treatment, not the amount charged by hospitals and physicians.

“(The new law) specifies that only costs actually paid by or on behalf of the plaintiff, or those that remain unpaid and for which the plaintiff or third party is legally responsible, can be included in the recovery,” Sen. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, said while speaking on the House floor.

Advocates have pointed out the new law does not impact the recovery of future medical costs or noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering.

Texas

Two tort reform bills of interest to the trucking industry are halfway through the Texas statehouse.

The first bill focuses on recovery of damages in civil actions.

The issue of inflated medical damage claims has been identified by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick as one of his legislative priorities for change.

Senate lawmakers approved a bill that is described as bringing uniformity to courtrooms by defining noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering.

SB30 states that awards for such damages could not be used to punish defendants, “make an example to others or serve a social good.”

OOIDA Board Member Danny Schnautz, president of Clark Freight Lines in Pasadena, Texas, recently told the House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee that the state is headed in the wrong direction with nuclear verdicts.

In 2023, Schnautz pointed out that six of the top 10 verdicts in the country were handed down in Texas. The outcomes totaled more than $200 million.

“These extreme awards are often the result of manipulated medical damages,” Schnautz said in submitted testimony.

He added that the potential of large verdicts encourages more lawsuits, “not necessarily grounded in merit but in the hope of securing a similar windfall.”

The second Senate-approved bill backed by Lt. Gov. Patrick, SB39, addresses problems stemming from a 2021 state law that was intended to reduce lawsuit abuse against the trucking industry but that never materialized.

The four-year-old rule requires a court to dismiss a lawsuit against a truck operator if the injury or death of another person was caused while the operator was carrying out his or her duties “within the scope of employment.”

For cases that go to trial, a bifurcated process was established. The term is used to describe a trial split into two phases. The initial phase focuses solely on the incident under the state’s negligence standard.

At issue is a provision included in the law that permits exceptions to the admission rule to allow plaintiff’s attorneys to introduce into the first phase of a bifurcated commercial vehicle collision trial evidence where trucking companies knowingly hired a negligent driver.

SB39 would remove from statute the admission rule exceptions.

Both bills await further House committee consideration.

My Statement on the Texas Senate’s Passage of Senate Bill 39 – Protecting Texas Trucking:https://t.co/ZDHjhbvWbs#txlege pic.twitter.com/f9V4meBQmC

— Office of the Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (@LtGovTX) April 24, 2025

Failures and veto

Tort reform efforts in Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma and South Carolina failed to win statehouse passage.

Virginia state lawmakers approved a bill that addressed the right to appeal in civil litigation, but Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed the measure.

State law limits the size of appeal bonds to $25 million.

HB2351 called for increasing the appeal bond cap to $200 million. An annual inflation adjuster was included.

Critics, including the Virginia Trucking Association and the American Tort Reform Association, recently wrote in a letter to the governor that the bill would “undermine the fairness of Virginia’s civil justice system by needlessly making appeals more expensive and, in many cases, practically unattainable.

“A bond of ($200 million) is beyond the financial reach of many defendants, and especially small businesses,” the letter states. “When a defendant cannot secure an appeal bond, it will either be forced to settle on unfavorable terms or pushed into bankruptcy.”

After the bill arrived on his desk, Youngkin soon sent it back to the House – the bill’s originating chamber – with his recommendation to revise the bill. His requested change called for reducing the proposed $200 million amount to $35 million.

“The financial barrier to appellate review would be significantly raised by this legislation, disproportionately impacting small and mid-sized businesses that may lack the financial ability to post such a large bond,” Youngkin wrote in his veto explanation.

House lawmakers refused to make the change. The legislative decision left the governor with three options: He could sign it without his requested change, he could veto it or he could allow the bill to become law without his signature.

Youngkin vetoed HB2351, killing it for the year. LL

More Land Line coverage of state news is available.