MONTANA REFORMS

Collateral Source Rule Reform: HB 567 (1987).  Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments, unless the source of reimbursement has a subrogation right under state or federal law.   Requires a court to offset damages over $50,000.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: HB 571 (1997): Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-705.  Retains the current system of modified joint and several liability, where joint liability does not apply to defendants found to be less than 50% at fault.  Revises the comparative negligence statute to permit the allocation of a percentage of liability to defendants who settle or are released from liability by the plaintiff.  Allows those defendants to intervene in the action to defend against claims affirmatively asserted.  Provides that joint liability shall apply in actions arising from an act or omission that violates a state environmental law relating to hazardous or deleterious substances. 

Joint and Several Liability Reform: HB 572 (1997); Mont. Code Anno., § 27-1-705 (2010).  Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages.  Takes effect only if HB 571 is held unconstitutional.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 212 (1995).  Restores the joint and several liability reforms of 1987, which had been weakened by the Montana Supreme Court.  Provides procedural safeguards to allow joint liability to apply only when a defendant is found to be more than 50% at fault.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 51 (1987).  Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be 50% or less at fault.  Parts of the 1987 comparative negligence statute allowing fault to be allocated to nonparties violated the due process provision of the State Constitution.  Newville v. State of Montana, Department of Family Services, 883 P.2d 793 (Mont. 1994).

Medical Liability Reform/Expressions of Sympathy: HB 24 (2005); Mont. Code Anno., § 26-1-814 (2010). Provides that statements of sympathy, apology, etc. by medical providers are inadmissible as evidence of liability in medical liability cases.

Medical Liability Reform/Expert Witness Standards: HB 64 (2005); Mont. Code Anno., § 26-2-601 (2010). Provides that an expert witness: must be a licensed health care provider in at least one state; routinely treat or routinely treated within the previous five years the subject matter of the malpractice claim; and demonstrate a familiarity with the standards of care and practice as related to the subject matter of the malpractice claim.  In cases involving treatment recommended by a physician, an expert witness may not testify on issues of negligence or standards of care unless the witness is also a physician.  In addition, a witness qualified as an expert in a medical specialty that is unrelated to the malpractice claim may only testify if it    can be proven that the standards of care and practice in the two specialties are substantially similar.

Medical Liability Reform: Collateral Source Rule Reform: Mont. Code Ann.  § 27‑1‑308.  Provides for awards to be offset by collateral sources that do not involve rights of subrogation in medical liability cases for awards over $50,000.

Medical Liability Reform: Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 309 (1995): Mont. Code Ann. § 25‑9‑411.   Limits the award of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000. 

Medical Liability Reform: Periodic Payment of Future Damages: HB 309 (1995): Mont. Code Ann. § 25‑9‑412.  Provides for the periodic payment of future damages over $50,000.

Punitive Damages Reform: SB 363 (2003); Amended Mont. Code Anno., § 27-1-220 (2010).  Limits punitive damages, unless otherwise expressed by statute, to $10 million or 3 percent of a defendant’s net worth, whichever is less.  The bill does not limit the amount of punitive damages that may be awarded in class action lawsuits.

Punitive Damages Reform: HB 212 (2003); Amended Mont. Code Anno., § 27-1-221 (2010).  Brings Montana statute into conformity with Supreme Court decision that punitive damages may be awarded by a two-thirds verdict rather than the previous requirement that punitive damages awards must be unanimous.  In Finstad v. W.R. Grace & Co., 2000 MT 228, 301 Mont. 240, 8 P.3d 778 (2000), the Montana Supreme Court held that the portion of section 27-1-221(6), MCA, which requires that an award of punitive damages must be unanimous as to liability and amount, violates Article II, section 26, of the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing a verdict by a two-thirds majority in all civil cases.

Punitive Damages Reform: HB 442 (1987): Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-221(5).  Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant acted with “actual fraud” or “actual malice.”  Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding.  Permits the admissibility of evidence of a defendant’s net worth only during the proceeding for the determination of punitive damages.  Requires a judge to review all punitive damages awards and to issue an opinion on his decision to increase or decrease an award, or to let it stand.

Punitive Damages Reform: Unanimous Jury: SB 212 (1997); Amended Mont. Code Anno., § 27-1-221 (2010).  Requires a unanimous jury to determine the amount of punitive damages awards. In Finstad v. W.R. Grace & Co., 2000 MT 228, 301 Mont. 240, 8 P.3d 778 (2000), the Montana Supreme Court held that the portion of section 27-1-221(6), MCA, which requires that an award of punitive damages must be unanimous as to liability and amount, violates Article II, section 26, of the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing a verdict by a two-thirds majority in all civil cases.

Product Liability Reform: SB 380 (1987).  Provides statutory defenses to product liability claims, including assumption of the risk and misuse of product.