Ohio Supreme Court Rules Limits on Damage Awards In Product Liability Lawsuits Constitutional

This week the Ohio Supreme Court today upheld the constitutionality of a law that limits the amount of damages that may be awarded to injured persons who win product liability lawsuits. Justices said in a 5-2 opinion that caps on non-economic and punitive damages do not violate a right to jury, due process, equal protection, or the single subject rule of the Ohio Constitution. Concurring were Justices Evelyn Stratton, Maureen O’Connor, Judith Lanzinger, and Robert Cupp. Justice Terrence O’Donnell dissented in part. Justice Paul Pfeifer dissented.

Chief Justice Thomas Moyer said in the lead opinion that the decision “affirms the General Assembly’s efforts over the last several decades to enact meaningful tort reforms.” Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson dealt with four tort-reform statutes (SB80, 125th General Assembly) that took effect April 7, 2005. Before the court was the question of whether limits the General Assembly imposed on non-economic and punitive damages are constitutional. Those provisions were contained in an overhaul of the personal injury lawsuit system (SB80, 125th General Assembly) enacted two years ago. The law, which took effect April 7 2005, placed a cap of $350,000 per plaintiff and $500,000 per occurrence on jury awards for non-economic damages. It also limits damages to twice the amount of compensatory damages awarded. The request to determine their constitutionality came from U.S. District Judge David Katz of Toledo.

Chief Justice Moyer noted in his majority opinion previous Supreme Courts have invalidated, for myriad reasons, proposed caps on medical malpractice damages, mandatory deduction of collateral benefits, and caps on punitive damages. Regardless of those opinions, Moyer noted that the court would not strike down legislation simply because it is similar to previous enactments that were declared unconstitutional. Moyer commented that the General Assembly has “made progress in tailoring its legislation to address the constitutional defects identified by the various majorities of this court.” Moyer also noted that the statutes “are sufficiently different from the previous enactments so as to warrant a fresh review of their individual merits.”

According to a legal opinion provided to the AMCNO regarding the decision, what Justice Moyer did in Arbino is to raise the bar for future courts. For three pages of his opinion he reviews all of the previous tort reform activity in the Ohio Supreme Court. Those cases are made the foundation for the Arbino ruling. He is trying to force future courts to either uphold Arbino or have to rule unconstitutional a whole line of cases. In the world of courts and judges, all pay homage to the principal of stare decisis. This term is latin and means to stand by that which is decided." All pay homage because to ignore stare decisis is to be considered an activist judge. What judges will do is pay lip service to stare decisis and then distinguish a previous case that should have controlled the outcome in the current case.

Justice Moyer is telling future courts that in order to invalidate Arbino, they will have to also ignore stare decisis. Nothing is foolproof or forever in the law but Justice Moyer and the four justices do their best to protect this opinion. Justice Terrence O’ Donnell dissented in part (just on the caps) and Justice Paul Pfeiffer dissented in whole. 

Although this decision does not involve medical malpractice caps or claims, as noted above this opinion could have an impact on this type of case in the future. The AMCNO is pleased with this decision and the opinion as written. More than a dozen organizations filed friend of the court briefs on behalf of plaintiffs and defendants in the case. The Academy of Medicine of Cleveland & Northern Ohio supported enactment of the limits and was listed as a member of the Ohio Alliance for Civil Justice (OACJ) on the Amicus Brief detailing such, in addition to such groups as the National Federation of Independent Business, the Ohio Association of Civil Trial Attorneys, the Ohio Hospital Association, the Product Liability Advisory Counsel, and the International Association of Defense Counsel.