In 1997 this child was born premature and was burned when a cauterizing tool was used near a respirator sparking a flash fire.  The child suffered long term lung damage and burns.

Now the case seemed to turn around whether the long term lung damage was actually caused by the fire or by the prematurity.  Nevertheless, the jury returned a $8.25 verdict against the hospital.

Sources:  Detroit News Brief,  Detroit News 5/28/05 article

In what I consider to be an unfair ending, the state law in Michigan takes most of the verdict and reduces it to $375,000.  In this case the jury decided that the lung damage was not caused by the fire, BUT they clearly decided that the burn damage was worth $8 Million over the child’s lifetime.  Michigan law takes all that analysis away and arbitrarily decides that all pain and suffering is worth what the state law says.

The hospital admitted responsibility for the burns and Brooks told the jury to award for the burns to the skin as they felt justified. The jurors said they were all close when they each offered an opinion on what was fair, and then they averaged them out, reaching $8 million.

But Fieger’s co-counsel, Ven Johnson, railed on the state Legislature for making laws that undo what the jury intended, reducing this award size to $375,000. Combined with the economic damages, the Laportes could receive as little as $575,000.

Jurors were not told during the trial that non-economic damages are automatically limited.

"This shows how sad the Michigan system is," Johnson said, adding that the law was created by former Gov. John Engler and Republican leaders to "trick juries into believing plaintiffs would have received full compensation. You have a law that is intentionally slanted in the favor of the guilty party. That is tragic.

"Their system right now is anti-victim. This baby did nothing wrong."

Don’t get hurt or have a malpractice claim in Michigan.  The state government there doesn’t believe your injuries are worth anything.

Source:  The Oakland Press

How many studies is this?  3? 4?  Here is another study showing that rising medical malpractice premiums are not caused by medical malpractice verdicts.

Medical malpractice awards are rising
in line with health care costs and are not likely the main
driver of soaring malpractice premiums as portrayed by many
doctors, a study suggested on Tuesday.

The data analysis of 184,500 malpractice payments from 1991
through 2003 from a national data bank was published in the
journal Health Affairs, dated June 1.

It found that the cases that get the most publicity — like
botched caesarian births or operation on a wrong body part –
are a fraction of all malpractice awards.

Source:   Reuters at Yahoo