As an attorney who specializes in patient advocacy, I am concerned that malpractice filings have taken on such a negative connotation in the past few years. The media has proliferated myths that support this negativity. For example, many assume that malpractice suits are responsible for driving thousands of doctors out of Pennsylvania. Or, it is often suggested that suits like these raise malpractice insurance and make it difficult for doctors to practice.
Given the judicial system’s persistent concerns regarding overburdened dockets, it came as a surprise to many practitioners when the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania decided in a 7-2 opinion that the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner can not require private passenger motor vehicle insurers to include binding arbitration provisions for resolving uninsured and underinsured motorists claims.
On December 31, 2001, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania clarified that insurance carriers are liable for compensatory damages as the results of their bad faith breach of an insurance contract. In Birth Center v. St. Paul Companies, Inc., 567 Pa. 386, 787 A.2d 376 (2001), the Court held that an,“insurer is liable for the known and/or foreseeable compensatory damages of its insured that reasonably flow from the bad faith conduct of the insured.”
