Earlier this month, I noted that the Oregon state supreme court overturned tort caps for state agencies.  I may be wrong, and I’m open to arguments that I am, but it still seems to me that this decision made sense.  Why shouldn’t all Oregonians have such protection? It would be good for everyone (lower medical costs and/or more doctors and hospitals).  Why should state workers be treated differently?However, the consequences of the decision of the state’s supreme court provide great evidence for why madmal caps are a good idea.  Overlawyered.com points out this AP report: 

Oregon Health & Science University plans to cut at least 200 jobs and raise tuition by at least 10 percent to free the money needed for higher insurance costs following an Oregon Supreme Court ruling.       

The December ruling cleared the way for the family of a brain-damaged child to pursue malpractice damages from the university. It effectively eliminated a liability cap of $200,000 designed to protect state agencies from major damage awards.

The cutbacks, expected to be announced Friday, were first reported by The Oregonian newspaper. Besides trimming jobs and hiking tuition, OHSU expects to restructure or close clinical, research and education programs, and scale back construction on Portland’s South Waterfront. (read the rest)

So there you have it: Cuts in doctors, slowdowns in new construction, higher prices.  This is a picture of how much worse Oregon’s medical care must be as a result of unlimited medical malpractice liability.  Imagine what would happen to the number of doctors and hospitals and the cost of medicine if the whole state had medical malpractice caps!