Editorial: Unlikely pair find harmony

Tuesday, June 13, 2000 | 9:37 a.m.

Trial lawyers and insurance companies usually find themselves at each other's throats. This friction often strays beyond the courtroom and into the halls of state legislatures when lawmakers tackle judicial reforms. For instance, efforts to curb punitive damages are championed by insurance companies as a way to rein in runaway judgments, while trial lawyers oppose them as infringing on the rights of the aggrieved to be justly compensated for their pain and suffering. Neither side rarely compromises to find common ground.

So readers of the Sun likely did a double-take when reading Cy Ryan's story in Friday's newspaper about a pilot project to streamline the handling of some civil cases, a program passed by the 1999 Legislature with the backing of both trial lawyers and insurance companies. The Nevada Supreme Court approved last week the procedures necessary to shorten civil trials involving $40,000 or less to just one day. Each side would have just three hours to present their case; one way this will be accomplished is that both sides will agree, before the trial starts, on the admissibility of some evidence and other technical details.

The Supreme Court will assess the pilot project as it progresses; one area that will have to be watched carefully is that the efforts to streamline the trials don't unintentionally constrain the ability of lawyers to elicit all the necessary facts which, in turn, are essential to obtaining justice. This program alone won't revolutionize our courts -- and if either the trial lawyers or insurance companies come out on the losing end too often, expect them to seek the program's repeal -- but it could turn out to be another sensible reform to our judicial system.

archive