TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- Automakers and other manufacturers scored a victory in the Florida Senate on Wednesday as the chamber passed a bill that would make it more difficult for injured parties to win product liability awards in some cases.
The bill would undo a 2001 Florida Supreme Court decision that came in a suit against Ford Motor Co. that says evidence of the primary cause of a crash, such as driver error, cannot be introduced in lawsuits alleging defective products caused additional or more serious injuries.
"This bill requires that the jury hear the whole story," said Sen. Garrett Richter, a Naples Republican sponsoring the bill." We should not disrespect a jury. We should put the facts on the table."
The largely party line vote, 28-12, sent the measure (SB 142) to the House where a similar bill (HB 201) is stalled in committee. Only one Republican, Sen. Thad Altman of Viera, voted against the bill and just one Democrat, Sen. Bill Montford of Tallahassee, voted for it.
Other Democrats argued the bill would shift medical costs for seriously injured crash victims to taxpayers and that manufacturers should be held accountable for their mistakes.
"What we're doing today is not just a lot of legalese," said Sen. Maria Sachs, D-Delray Beach. "We are reversing the Florida Supreme Court decision on this case that involves real people -- Floridians."
The legislation has been the focus of a lobbying duel between businesses interests and trial lawyers who represent injured parties.
In cheering its passage, Associated Industries of Florida president and CEO Barney Bishop said the Supreme Court ruling is not only unfair but is keeping auto makers from locating in the state.
"Just like any individual or business, auto manufacturers are entitled to a level playing field in the courtroom," Bishop said in a statement. "In these turbulent financial times, we can no longer allow the legal climate to impede efforts to attract businesses to our state."
The high court ruling came in the case of Karen D'Amario whose son, Clifford Harris, then 15, was badly burned and lost three limbs when the car in which he was a passenger crashed into a tree and then exploded. The driver, Stanley Liveronois, also 15, was killed.
D'Amario alleged her son's injuries were due mostly to the explosion caused by a defective relay switch on a fuel pump. The jury sided with Ford, which argued the switch was fine and blamed the fire on the collision because it ruptured the car's oil pan.
The justices ruled that the jury was confused by evidence that the driver was drunk and speeding instead of focusing on the product liability allegation. The opinion reversed the jury's verdict and said such evidence should be excluded from future cases that allege enhanced injuries.
Sen. David Simmons, R-Maitland, characterized the bill as a compromise because the Senate on Tuesday accepted an amendment he offered that says judges still can exclude evidence if it's irrelevant or prejudicial such as the fact a driver had been drunk. The difference is judges would make those decisions on a case-by-cases basis instead of the blanket exclusion ordered by the Supreme Court.
The bill would undo a 2001 Florida Supreme Court decision that came in a suit against Ford Motor Co. that says evidence of the primary cause of a crash, such as driver error, cannot be introduced in lawsuits alleging defective products caused additional or more serious injuries.
"This bill requires that the jury hear the whole story," said Sen. Garrett Richter, a Naples Republican sponsoring the bill." We should not disrespect a jury. We should put the facts on the table."
The largely party line vote, 28-12, sent the measure (SB 142) to the House where a similar bill (HB 201) is stalled in committee. Only one Republican, Sen. Thad Altman of Viera, voted against the bill and just one Democrat, Sen. Bill Montford of Tallahassee, voted for it.
Other Democrats argued the bill would shift medical costs for seriously injured crash victims to taxpayers and that manufacturers should be held accountable for their mistakes.
"What we're doing today is not just a lot of legalese," said Sen. Maria Sachs, D-Delray Beach. "We are reversing the Florida Supreme Court decision on this case that involves real people -- Floridians."
The legislation has been the focus of a lobbying duel between businesses interests and trial lawyers who represent injured parties.
In cheering its passage, Associated Industries of Florida president and CEO Barney Bishop said the Supreme Court ruling is not only unfair but is keeping auto makers from locating in the state.
"Just like any individual or business, auto manufacturers are entitled to a level playing field in the courtroom," Bishop said in a statement. "In these turbulent financial times, we can no longer allow the legal climate to impede efforts to attract businesses to our state."
The high court ruling came in the case of Karen D'Amario whose son, Clifford Harris, then 15, was badly burned and lost three limbs when the car in which he was a passenger crashed into a tree and then exploded. The driver, Stanley Liveronois, also 15, was killed.
D'Amario alleged her son's injuries were due mostly to the explosion caused by a defective relay switch on a fuel pump. The jury sided with Ford, which argued the switch was fine and blamed the fire on the collision because it ruptured the car's oil pan.
The justices ruled that the jury was confused by evidence that the driver was drunk and speeding instead of focusing on the product liability allegation. The opinion reversed the jury's verdict and said such evidence should be excluded from future cases that allege enhanced injuries.
Sen. David Simmons, R-Maitland, characterized the bill as a compromise because the Senate on Tuesday accepted an amendment he offered that says judges still can exclude evidence if it's irrelevant or prejudicial such as the fact a driver had been drunk. The difference is judges would make those decisions on a case-by-cases basis instead of the blanket exclusion ordered by the Supreme Court.