Here are the details of the lead tort reform bill for the upcoming session.

The big dog is the “Omnibus Premium Reduction Act of 2020”, HB 9, which carries the water for tort reformers. It (1) increases the prescriptive period for delictual actions to a two-year prescriptive period, (2) reduces the threshold for a jury trial to $5,000, (3) provides for reduced damages for amounts paid or payable from collateral sources, and (4) repeals the right of direct action against an insurer.

The collateral source changes are comprehensive: (1) reductions in medical bills based upon the write-offs or write-downs by insurance companies or Medicare are not collateral sources and are therefore not recoverable as damages in civil litigation; (2) when a plaintiff's medical expenses have been paid by a health insurance company or Medicare, plaintiff's recovery of medical expenses is limited to the amount actually paid to the healthcare provider by the insurer or Medicare, and not the amount billed; (3) if the plaintiff pays the medical expenses directly to the healthcare provider when health insurance is available, recovery is limited to the amount that would have been paid by the insurer or Medicare; (4) payment for medical expenses that could be submitted under Workers’ Compensation is limited to the amount payable under the Workers' Compensation fee schedule.

SB 45 would reduce the cause of action threshold for a jury trial from $50,000 to $15,000.

HB 46 enacts new procedures for “expedited jury trials.”

HB 84 requires an automobile insurer to provide liability policy limits to a third-party claimant or his attorney within 30 days of receipt of a written request from the claimant or his attorney. It also requires the insurer to disclose: (1) the insurer's name; (2) the name of each insured; and (3) an indication of coverage limits or that the insurer did not issue a policy that provides coverage for the automobile accident.

There are (so far) a handful of proposed evidentiary changes:
HB 78 provides that evidence of force of impact may be used to determine the causation of an injury and nature and extent of any injuries sustained.
HB 79 requires that documentary evidence of past lost wages be produced and that failure to produce documentary evidence precludes the party from making a claim for past lost wages.
The first of two seatbelt bills, HB 39 authorizes the introduction of evidence of failure to wear a safety belt in order to establish both comparative negligence and damages, except when the operator or passenger is under 16 years of age, or when the tortfeasor is charged with operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated.
SB 12 allows consideration of evidence of failure to wear a safety belt in an action to recover damages arising from a motor vehicle accident as comparative negligence and removes provisions prohibiting its admission to mitigate damages.