In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. - U.S. Constitution, 7th Amendment (Bill of Rights)

The founding fathers preserved the right to a jury trial, which was already firmly established in British common law long before our country was formed. Legislators today are trying to take away this right through legislation designed to restrict our access to juries and to limit the amounts jurors can award. They call it “tort reform,” which is a lot like calling “lite” beer a diet drink.

In the State of California, we already have one example of “tort reform” in the field of medical malpractice. Back in 1978, our state legislatures put a $250,000 cap on the amount of general damages that a victim of medical negligence can receive. Even if a doctor negligently amputates the wrong leg or cuts the spinal column, the maximum amount that can be paid to make up for the years of suffering is $250,000. If a jury thinks the amount should be $25 million dollars, this law requires the court to reduce the award to $250,000.

The result? Fewer and fewer lawyers will even handle medical malpractice cases. Injured families are unable to be repaid by the responsible party—the hospitals and doctors – and the cost is often passed on to society at large, boosting the cost of public services and the taxpayers’ burden.

But what about the 7th Amendment restriction on re-examining the results of a jury trial? What about it? Our California Supreme Court has upheld this law against claims of unconstitutionality. And our legislators have refused to raise the cap, even though the cost of living has increased. According to U.S. Department of Labor figures, it would take $695,169 today to buy what $250,000 would buy in 1978.

Insurance companies and big businesses like to use the phrase “runaway juries” as an excuse to limit the right to jury trials. Who are they to say that a jury has run away? Juries listen to the evidence, watch the witnesses and make independent assessments. The “corporate sector” cares only about its own bottom line.

Placing financial responsibility on the ones who cause the harm protects the public interest in other ways, as well. Allowing juries to compensate injured persons fully and fairly forces the perpetrators of harm to reassess their behavior and to make changes. How else can we Davids of the world get the Goliaths to change?

In order to stop the erosion of our rights, we have to start paying attention. Personal Vigilance!! Be aware! Be concerned! Speak out! The next legislative session will see attempts to limit our rights to jury trials in the areas of products liability, medical malpractice and automobile injury. Be prepared to speak out to protect your rights.