PointofLaw.com

FORUM FEATURED DISCUSSIONS PoL COLUMNS LEGAL EXPERTS ARTICLES BOOKS PODCASTS LINKS MASTHEAD ADVANCED SEARCH

FORUM

« NYC plans "interventions" with diabetics | Courts Ignoring Federal Rule of Evidence 702: »

May 5, 2006


More on medical-malpractice insurance

Robert Hunter gives an "I'm rubber and you're glue" response that ignores the vast majority of the criticisms Martin Grace and I made, and falsely claims we had no data in our report. Martin and I will decide over the weekend whether it merits a longer response than that.

Unfortunately for Hunter, this comes in the same week that HCLA catches Hunter admitting that tort reform lowers insurance rates and that a new Daniel P. Kessler study finds that "increases in tort awards, settlement payments, and defense costs explain why premiums have risen" and that the evidence Hunter adduces in claiming an "insurance cycle" is solely responsible for premium increases is "inconclusive."

Posted by Ted Frank at 1:39 PM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
Medicine and Law
Statistics/Empirical Work









 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.