The Michigan Chamber supports legislation establishing a Health Court for the exclusive purpose of resolving healthcare disputes and a Business Court for the exclusive purpose of hearing commercial cases. The Chamber supports the creation of pilot courts and the expansion of Health Courts or Business Courts if pilot projects prove successful. Further, the Chamber supports federal legislation to provide start-up funding for Health Courts and establish a medical appeals court.

Background

The concept of having particular disputes resolved in special courts is not new. Special courts exist today for workers' compensation, tax, and domestic relation disputes, as well as for bankruptcies and other areas where complex and technical subject matter demands special expertise for dispute resolution.

Proponents of bills to expand specialized courts to include healthcare and commercial disputes argue that existing specialized courts are functioning as an important part of our justice system and should be expanded to provide for more consistent, efficient, fair and reliable rulings.

Supporters of special Health Courts – including the Michigan State Medical Society, the Michigan Osteopathic Society and Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch (M-LAW) -- argue that unreliable justice is destroying the American health care system because medical justice is random; healthcare costs are skyrocketing; medical errors are widespread; and distrust of the justice system is undermining the healthcare profession. They argue that reliability must be restored to the medical justice system by creating special Health Courts with judges dedicated full-time to resolving healthcare disputes – and leaving juries, which usually lack medical or scientific training, out of the equation. They argue that patients injured by mistakes should be compensated for their injuries without waiting years and without paying one-third or more to their lawyers, and that unfairly charged doctors should be affirmatively protected. Finally, they argue that the reliable justice Health Courts will create will improve the quality of health care by clarifying standards of proper care and providing incentives for doctors to keep up with the latest developments in medicine.

The creation of Health Courts will require cooperation between the states and the federal government. The federal government has an important role to play, in establishing a medical appeals court and in providing start-up funding for health courts. Ultimately, a new Health Court system could be developed in the states on a pilot project or statewide basis.

Proponents of the creation of a Business Court system dedicated exclusively to the resolution of commercial disputes – including the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee of the State Bar of Michigan -- argue that a well-functioning business community benefits from an effective judiciary. Businesses often express dissatisfaction with the judicial system not only because overburdened courts take months to decide cases but also because outcomes are unpredictable. Supporters of Business Courts argue that a specialized court is particularly appropriate for commercial cases because these cases frequently are very complex or draw upon a body of law developed in response to the unique nature of commercial disputes. They argue that devoting specialized judicial resources to commercial cases will lead to more consistency in the disposition of litigated cases and increased efficiency in the use of judicial resources. A dozen states -- including California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin -- have introduced specialization into their courts to deal with business disputes.

Opposition to proposals to create Health and Business Courts mainly comes from plaintiff attorneys, including the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA). These opponents argue that the idea of Health Courts is radical because it eliminates juries in medical malpractice cases; is subject to Congressional whims because compensation for injured patients would be determined by a pre-set payment schedule established by a Commission appointed by the President and Congress; and is unfair because it adopts a one-size-fits-all schedule for injured victims. Opponents of Business Courts argue that the concept is elitist and would afford a higher-level quality of justice to corporations at the expense of individuals. Opponents argue that both proposals are expensive; however, it is important to note that fiscal analysis is not available for either.

The Chamber’s Health and Human Resources Committee heard a presentation from M-LAW regarding Health Courts on November 9, 2005. Although concerns were raised over the fact that implementing state legislation would require a Constitutional Amendment to eliminate the right to trial by jury, the Committee unanimously agreed to recommend to the Board of Directors that the Michigan Chamber endorse the concept and establishment of pilot projects.