Ohio Court Weighs Pain-And-Suffering Cap in Ortho Evra Case
A woman who says she suffered life-threatening blood clots from a birth control medication wants the Ohio Supreme Court to declare the state's cap on pain-and-suffering awards unconstitutional. The court planned to hear arguments in the lawsuit filed by Melisa Arbino of Cincinnati over the Ortho Evra Birth Control Patch, which she contends caused permanent physical damage and threatens her ability to have children in the future. The challenge to a 2005 law limiting pain-and-suffering awards is the first to reach the court. It is being closely watched by companies who support the concept of caps and attorneys representing injured people. The GOP-controlled Legislature approved the caps two years ago, limiting pain-and-suffering awards at between $350,000 and $500,000 for less severe injuries. The bill also put limits on jury awards meant to punish companies for wrongdoing in faulty product cases. Businesses long said they needed such a bill in part because of rising insurance rates as a result of high jury verdicts. Attorneys for Arbino contest that argument, saying insurance companies have raised their rates because of investment losses, not expensive jury verdicts. "Is it constitutional to deprive someone of their right to a trial by jury simply to promote the private economy?" said Janet Abaray, a Cincinnati attorney representing Arbino. Johnson & Johnson, makers of the patch, countered that companies need the predictability that caps bring to doing business in Ohio.
Continue reading "Ohio Court Weighs Pain-And-Suffering Cap in Ortho Evra Case" »
