Today CALA released a report on litigation costs to 12 of California’s school districts, finding that in just three fiscal years, these schools spent $98.7 million.

The report examined verdicts, settlements and outside counsel costs to Capistrano Unified, Elk Grove Unified, Fresno Unified, Kern High School, Long Beach Unified, Los Angeles Unified, Merced Union High School, Modesto City, Poway Unified, San Diego Unified, San Juan Unified, and Santa Ana Unified.

You would think at a time when a record number of our schools are in financial trouble and further education cuts are likely ahead, we would not allow these litigation costs to go unchecked. California continues to rank among the most litigious states in every study yet we rank at the bottom in many measures of student performance. The more dollars our schools have to pay in litigation costs, the less we have to improve our students’ performance.

California ranks 45^th in 4^th grade math and second to last in 8^th grade reading. At the same time, the state 46^th in the Institute for Legal Reform’s Lawsuit Climate 2010 report and 41^st in the 2010 U.S. Tort Liability Index.

We hear story after story of activities schools are forced to cut, yet no one ever talks about one of the most unpredictable costs of all - litigation. These numbers reflect just 12 of California’s school districts. With nearly 1,000 in the state, there’s no telling what the total number is.

The $98.7 million spent in just three years could have been put to much better use across the state. That money could have paid the salaries of more than 1,530 teachers, purchased nearly 600 new school buses, more than 1.1 million school desks or 246,762 desktop computer packages.

Just like our cities, counties and the state need to be more accountable, so do our schools. There needs to be more transparency and the school districts needs to be more up front about these costs. If parents are being asked to pay more, at least the schools can be more accountable for how they are spending it.

A recent lawsuit against Skilled Healthcare California LLC has had little or no coverage and it is amazing. Skilled Healthcare California was hit with a penalty of $671 million dollars by a Humboldt County jury. And that does not even include the punitive damages. The core issue was whether the company violated a state law requiring nursing homes to provide a minimum of 3.2 nursing hours per patient per day (ppd). The key word here is minimum.

Senior care in this state and country is a huge issue. Skilled Healthcare has never received one complaint against it on the California Nursing Home Directory. However, this did not stop the plaintiffs' attorneys. The judgement was leveled against Skilled Nursing on behalf of the 32,000 patients it has in California, awarding the maximum damages over a six year period to the whole class.

This is a company that provides 14,000 jobs to people in California. Its stock price plummeted 75% on news of the judgement. It looks like it cannot appeal the decision because to do so you have to post a bond of 150% to do so and its assets are approximately $2 million. It has also exhausted its primary professional liability insurance.

Skilled Healthcare California has 22 facilities in California. What happens now?  Does it file for bankruptcy? Close it's doors? What happens to the 14,000 employees? Are they let go? Considering this state has the third worst unemployment rate in the nation that would be a disaster. And what about the 32,000 patients?

The whole thing is a mess. How can this happen? There has to be a better way. The only people that are truly are going to benefit from this sham of a class action are the shameless trial lawyers. Since the punitive damages have not been awarded, I have not seen their fee, but it will likely fall between 30% and 40% of the total award. All because this jury in Humboldt did not feel the company met a nursing patient ratio. Unbelievable.

The North County Times reports that "9 in 10 docs blame lawsuit fears for overtesting and MDs also agree more protection is needed from litigious patients"

We all pay the price for lawsuit abuse. Any substantial Heathcare Reform plan should have included a serious effort to address the problem of malpractice lawsuit abuse! We need a national version of California's MICRA laws that limit the amount for punitive damages to $250,000.

Yes, real victims need to be compensated for their injury, but as long as we reward plaintiffs lawyers with inflated payouts our healthcare system will remain under siege.

We should listen to the doctors who, as you report, tell us they are doing unnecessary tests just to protect themselves from these unwarranted malpractice suits. That is money that could othewise be used to expand the coverage those who really do need healthcare.

As malpractice lawsuit abuse attacks our medical industry, It could ultimately drive our doctors out of business, and that will have a direct impact on all of us!

The death of former Assemblyman Keith Richman last Friday is a great loss for California, on many different levels. He was a Republican Assemblyman representing the 38th District in the state from 2000 to 2006. He was a huge advocate for pension and healthcare reform before it was the thing to do and he was always above partisan politics.

For California CALA it is also a loss. Keith Richman served on our Statewide Advisory Council.  He served on the Council for two years and was a strong tort reformer. He was always willing to take on the trial lawyers and did it with passion. As a doctor he knew the importance of tort reform in the healthcare field.

Keith Richman was a true reformer. He knew that lawsuits were not a partisan issue. Lawyers don't check your party registration before they file a lawsuit. I know he will be missed by a large number of people on both sides of the aisle. He was a great man, a great father and husband and a great public servant. The state of California has truly lost a class act. CACALA extends to his family and friends our deepest condolences.