- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LA State Rep Michael Melerine: Gov. Landry needs to sign House Bill 423 into law
Posted on 6/12/24 at 9:54 am to SammyTiger
Posted on 6/12/24 at 9:54 am to SammyTiger
quote:
there is no prior history of an injury it should be assumed the accident caused it
Not quite it.
A person could have a substantial pre-accident history but if they have no indications of treatment or complaints for some time prior to an accident (varies by judge, which is part of the problem), they get Housley.
0
Posted on 6/12/24 at 9:55 am to BigBinBR
quote:
The scam is that an ambulance chaser will use the same doctor for all of their clients. The doctor doesn’t charge the clients they “charge” the attorney office. They charge exorbitant prices to drive the claim amount up.
not relevant here but Ambulances and ER will try and charge the liability insurance their full bill with our without an attorney. If you hit someone you’re in the hook for their bills and Hospitals would prefer not to get their contract rate.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 9:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Someone needs to explain this "reform" to me because this already exists
Get sued by some chick with back problems before accident then say you caused back problems. Company settles even though she had history of back problems.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:00 am to dgnx6
quote:
Get sued by some chick with back problems before accident then say you caused back problems. Company settles even though she had history of back problems.
It’s more like get sued by someone who had an esi in 2016 and hasn’t been to a doctor since you don’t get to blame their 2016 accident for the spine surgery they need now.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:09 am to ragincajun03
Yep, word is this is getting vetoed.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:11 am to BigJim
quote:
Yep, word is this is getting vetoed.
Outright fricking theft
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:34 am to ragincajun03
It is a very interesting showdown.
The trial lawyers didn't have a reliable Democrat in the last election they could get behind. So they coalesced support behind the most "reliable" Republican, Landry. They understand LA is a "red state" and tort reform was a big issue pushed by the GOP. Ironically, many of the trial lawyers are very conservative as well...except when it comes to laws effecting their livelihood.
Recognizing the sea change towards more tort reform, the trial lawyers were willing to budge on some issues. The significant weakening to outright abandonment of collateral source rule aint one of them. There was some degree of tort reform in the 2020 session. Including some changes to the collateral source rule they could see coming down the pike with a line of LASC rulings. But the trial lawyers and GOP both knew JBE was going to reliably shut down any tort reform that was too unpalatable to the trial lawyers.
Landry is in a tight spot. He's portrayed himself as a Cajun MAGA, red meat conservative. But he's also got SIGNIFICANT backing and money from the trial lawyers. He ABSOLUTELY wants to veto HB 423 that is on his desk. But it appears industry and some GOP legislators are launching a very public campaign to hold his feet to the fire essentially challenging him to show he is really a hardcore conservative or just a phony who is hardcore right on minor issues (banning whippets) but not major business issues.
IMO, he vetoes the bill and challenges the Republican's to override it. When they don't (and they won't) he can then shift the blame back to them
The trial lawyers didn't have a reliable Democrat in the last election they could get behind. So they coalesced support behind the most "reliable" Republican, Landry. They understand LA is a "red state" and tort reform was a big issue pushed by the GOP. Ironically, many of the trial lawyers are very conservative as well...except when it comes to laws effecting their livelihood.
Recognizing the sea change towards more tort reform, the trial lawyers were willing to budge on some issues. The significant weakening to outright abandonment of collateral source rule aint one of them. There was some degree of tort reform in the 2020 session. Including some changes to the collateral source rule they could see coming down the pike with a line of LASC rulings. But the trial lawyers and GOP both knew JBE was going to reliably shut down any tort reform that was too unpalatable to the trial lawyers.
Landry is in a tight spot. He's portrayed himself as a Cajun MAGA, red meat conservative. But he's also got SIGNIFICANT backing and money from the trial lawyers. He ABSOLUTELY wants to veto HB 423 that is on his desk. But it appears industry and some GOP legislators are launching a very public campaign to hold his feet to the fire essentially challenging him to show he is really a hardcore conservative or just a phony who is hardcore right on minor issues (banning whippets) but not major business issues.
IMO, he vetoes the bill and challenges the Republican's to override it. When they don't (and they won't) he can then shift the blame back to them
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:39 am to Alt26
The republicans will get the 2 year SOL passed which in my mind is a good thing.
it will get a ton more cases settled before court costs and defense costs are involved.
but like I said, we did this already. we went from 100% of the difference between billed and paid to 40% and our premiums went up. they’re pretending 20% will
matter.
it will get a ton more cases settled before court costs and defense costs are involved.
but like I said, we did this already. we went from 100% of the difference between billed and paid to 40% and our premiums went up. they’re pretending 20% will
matter.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:42 am to SammyTiger
quote:
and our premiums went up
Yeah...insane inflation for vehicle damages/replacement and supply chain issues blowing up time to repair and rental had nothing to do with that.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:48 am to udtiger
quote:
Yeah...insane inflation for vehicle damages/replacement and supply chain issues blowing up time to repair and rental had nothing to do with that.
Damn I guess the ever increasing profits they report have nothing to do with it.
They have no problem
blaming rates on Plaintiffs when they are trying to get this shite passed but they blame inflation and costs after when they don’t make their premiums more affordable.
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 10:52 am
Posted on 6/12/24 at 10:49 am to Alt26
quote:
IMO, he vetoes the bill and challenges the Republican's to override it. When they don't (and they won't) he can then shift the blame back to them
Well if I'm one of those legislators he shifts blame to, then I'm waging an outright war on the Governor, because the ONLY reason a veto override is needed is because he vetoed something in the first place that passed by a pretty decent majority.
Of course, due to unfortunately the 4th Floor in Louisiana having too much power, and apparently gaining a bit more after this past Legislative Session, I'm sure the legislators will just sit quietly in the corner and take the blame thrown at them from the Governor's office...if your above scenario plays out.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:12 am to ragincajun03
quote:
Well if I'm one of those legislators he shifts blame to, then I'm waging an outright war on the Governor, because the ONLY reason a veto override is needed is because he vetoed something in the first place that passed by a pretty decent majority.
Of course. It's a PR battle at this point. Landry DOES NOT want to sign the bill and he made that known behind closed does during session. LABI and industry donors put enough pressure on the GOP to pass it and force Landry to sign it. If he vetos it he is going to take a PR hit as his conservative bona-fides will be challenged. But when the GOP doesn't override it (and they won't given the last few pathetic veto sessions), he (tacitly) will launch his own PR campaign touting them as feckless, while quietly lending support to their challengers in upcoming elections.
It's a political Mexican standoff. If Landry's signs it he almost assuredly loses the trial lawyer support (at least initially) who helped put him in office and are expecting repayment. If he vetoes it he will be attacked by conservative media/industry in a red state and lose their support. If he has any aspirations of going to Washington one day as, say, Senator Landry, he's going to need them.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:19 am to Alt26
quote:
If Landry's signs it he almost assuredly loses the trial lawyer support (at least initially) who helped put him in office and are expecting repayment.
What's the repercussions to him at this time if he does sign the bill and loses their support? He's already won the Gov's office, and we know unseating an incumbent Governor in Louisiana is an extremely tall order, especially with the current voter makeup and who Democrats have on their bench (lack of a bench) to challenge and unseat Landry.
Does the trial lawyer lobby have some sort of insider info they've been holding back that if Landry pissed them off, they could ruin his political future? I'd think that's about the only thing they could do to him at this point.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:32 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't really do PI anymore so I'm fine with revising the CSR.
Man I don't know. I don't have a lot going on with PI either but the idea that the tortfeasor should not benefit from the contractual advantages gained by a victim seems sound to me.
quote:
That's basically the last bullet in the chamber, though. There isn't much else they can do.
Don't disagree here. I'm not sure there is anything you can do short of requiring actual test that are difficult that keep complete morons from obtaining a DL. We do not have an intelligent population driving around.
I also struggle with my damn near absolute 1A stance and the fact that I would love for the LSBA to take a real hard look at also toning down some of the advertisement.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:37 am to SammyTiger
quote:I don't even care about premiums when it comes to this. The windfall is just wrong.
as to the collateral source rule, did anyone’s insurance premium drop when we changed the collateral source rule from 100% of the difference to 40?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:47 am to AlxTgr
quote:
I don't even care about premiums when it comes to this. The windfall is just wrong.
yeah because health insurance is so cheap and free the a-hole who couldn’t get offf their phone and rear ended you and the insurance company who wouldn’t pay you till you lawyered up should get all the benefits of that.
there are a lot of ways we’re behind but we just changed the CSR to be in line with most of the country or more conservative.
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 11:50 am
Posted on 6/12/24 at 11:48 am to BigBinBR
quote:
The scam is that an ambulance chaser will use the same doctor for all of their clients.
Sometimes you don't even need the lawyer...
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 11:49 am
Posted on 6/12/24 at 12:09 pm to SammyTiger
quote:That's not a benefit. I see you don't actually want to address the money that fits no category of damages.
yeah because health insurance is so cheap and free the a-hole who couldn’t get offf their phone and rear ended you and the insurance company who wouldn’t pay you till you lawyered up should get all the benefits of that
Posted on 6/12/24 at 12:11 pm to ragincajun03
quote:This is the case now and always has been.
would have required a claimant to prove their alleged injuries were caused by the accident
Posted on 6/12/24 at 12:12 pm to CreoleTigerEsq
The Melerine’s are good people. If you ever get the chance to meet them you will see that they actually care about this state and especially the kids in this state. If a lobbyist or special interest wants to help them fix the worst education system in the nation then so be it. All hands on deck to fix that problem IMO.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News