|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
South Carolina Senate majority leader Shane Massey is firing back at critics who have accused him of self-dealing in connection with the increasingly contentious debate over lawsuit reform in the Palmetto State.
Last month, Massey introduced S. 244 – proposed legislation which would address several glaring issues with respect to South Carolina’s current anti-competitive liability laws. Massey’s bill is cosponsored by Senate president Thomas Alexander and six other senators.
Most significantly, Massey’s legislation would address how South Carolina assigns blame in liability lawsuits – fixing a structure which is patently unfair to certain defendants.
“In assessing percentage of fault, the jury or the court shall consider the fault of all persons or entities whose alleged act or omission was a proximate cause of the alleged damage, regardless of whether the person or entity was or could have been named as a party,” the bill noted. “The percentage of fault of the parties to the action may total less than one hundred percent if the jury finds that fault contributing to the claimant’s loss has also come from a nonparty or nonparties.”
This is a key component of the reform package embraced by Palmetto Promise – a Columbia, S.C.-based conservative advocacy organization. Just this month, Palmetto Promise issued a report (.pdf) addressing the punitive impact of South Carolina’s current system – which imposes a $3,181 per year, per household “lawsuit tax.”
***
Massey’s bill would also strike the section of current state law which exempts alcohol-related cases from being subjected to a fairer liability structure.
“In typical liability cases in South Carolina, a defendant with deep pockets could pay 100% of the damages to a plaintiff though his or her actual contribution to the tort could have been 50.1%,” the Palmetto Promise report noted. “Under this alcohol exception, 1% of responsibility could result in being responsible for paying 100% of the judgment.”
Does that sound fair?
No… and it is one of several trial lawyer-friendly tort provisions which has put South Carolina at a tremendous competitive disadvantage compared to states like Florida and Tennessee.
Eager to keep their competitive advantage in the Palmetto State, trial lawyers are pulling out all the stops in an effort to kill Massey’s bill. In addition to rolling out a brand new “coalition” opposed to it, social media influencers have been blistering Massey (here, here and here) as a self-interested sellout.
“This bill looks like a sweetheart deal for (Massey’s) client, the ultra-woke Allstate,” national operative Ryan Fournier wrote on X. “It’s designed to let insurance companies dodge responsibility for negligence, putting profits before people.”
How is Massey responding to the onslaught?
During a Senate hearing last week, the veteran legislative leader from Aiken, S.C. put trial lawyers and their lobbyists on notice.
***
S.C. Senate majority leader @ShaneMassey addresses his critics in the trial lawyer lobby… blasts them for being behind a social media offensive targeting him. #SCStateHouse pic.twitter.com/MeXND6U66R
— FITSNews (@fitsnews) February 10, 2025
***
“Your folks, the people who enjoy Twitter, who are not brave enough to be here and say things in person because they can do it from their mother’s basement, they can say whatever they want,” Massey said. “They can call us all corrupt or on the take or whatever.”
“I’ll tell you, I’m willing to have good faith conversations,” Massey continued. “I’m not willing to have bad faith conversations.”
Massey then proceeded to throw down the gauntlet.
“If there are people who just want to continue to say no, and not want to talk, that’s fine too, because I’m at the point now where, very candidly, multiple offers have been made – the time limit has expired,” Massey said, likening himself to a prosecutor negotiating with a defendant.
“I’m perfectly happy going and trying this case because the jury’s different,” Massey said.
That’s a reference to the new composition of the S.C. Senate, which saw trial lawyer allies lose several key Democratic seats – and which saw conservatives replace centrist Republicans in several other districts.
“I want to make sure everybody understands that,” Massey said. “This is not a ‘no, we’re not going to do anything’ scenario. There is no way that this body does nothing.”
Translation? Massey has the votes… and thanks to the boneheaded attempt by the trial lawyers to take him out, he now has the moral high ground.
“Senators are rallying around him,” one S.C. State House source told me. “The trial lawyers overplayed their hand.”
***
***
In fairness, not all Palmetto State trial attorneys were engaging a scorched earth approach to the debate. Some were making reasoned points on behalf of their industry – i.e. having a “good faith conversation.”
“The number of lawsuits being filed only increases when bad faith claims handling by insurance companies increases,” attorney Victoria Smith told me. “If fair efforts are made to resolve claims, lawsuits can be avoided. Trial lawyers are the only ones who can stand up to insurance companies and mega corporations and hold them accountable when they act unreasonably. Our civil justice system is the only thing that can keep insurance companies and mega corporations from acting unfairly.”
According to Smith, “South Carolina does not need tort reform – it needs insurance industry reform.”
“Injured people who want to be treated fairly are not the problem,” she said. “Insurance companies who want to avoid paying legitimate claims and delay resolution are the problem.”
Smith said lawmakers ought to “impose caps on what insurance companies are allowed to charge for premiums and restrictions on when insurance companies can alter rates.”
“The insurance industry is not hurting for money,” she said. “The playbook that they use to increase profits involves formulas and systems designed to prolong resolution and increase expense associated with fighting the insurance company’s often unfair decisions.”
Count on FITSNews to keep our audience apprised as to the latest developments as this debate moves forward in the S.C. General Assembly.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
2 comments
The only people the current structure benefits are trial lawyers. In its current iteration it kills small businesses. Someone can get drunk at home, go to a bar have one drink and then drive away and injure or kill someone and the bar can be held 100% liable even though they are actually less than 10% responsible.
Allocation of comparative fault rules has nothing to do with insurance companies being unfair or dragging out cases. This is a red herring being bandied about by the trial lawyers’ association to protect their immensely unfair gravy train that kills small to mid-sized businesses who are in turn getting killed by the outrageous liability insurance premiums they have to pay to be in business in this state. It adds excessive cost to literally every good and service provided in this state.