Senate committee amends medical malpractice bill

SANTA FE — A bill that would limit punitive damages in medical malpractice cases emerged from a Senate committee Tuesday with three amendments that potentially complicate its passage into law.

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 8-1 to advance House Bill 99 to the Senate floor with less than two days remaining before the session ends at noon Thursday.

The Senate is expected to consider the bill as early as Tuesday afternoon. If the Senate approves the amended version of the bill, it would return to the House, which could then approve or reject the amendments.

Sen. Katy Duhigg, D-Albuquerque, cast the lone vote against the do-pass recommendation by the committee. New Mexico has no assurances from insurers that passage of the bill would reduce malpractice insurance premiums for physicians, she said.

"We are lying to our health care providers and we are lying to the public," Duhigg said after the vote.

Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, the bill's lead sponsor, said after the vote that the committee's actions were "problematic" because they create uncertainty about the value of injuries in medical malpractice cases.

The amendments appear to leave intact a key feature of House Bill 99 that would limit punitive damage awards for the first time in New Mexico. 

The bill also would create a tiered system that would cap punitive damages at about $1 million for independent physicians and clinics, $6 million for locally owned hospitals and $15 million for larger corporate-owned hospitals.

The House approved House Bill 99 on Saturday by a vote of 66-3, sending the measure to the Senate for consideration.

In its amended version, "there is significant potential for windfalls and thereby jacking up the cost for everyone across the state," Chandler said.

An amendment offered by committee chair Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, and approved by a 5-4 vote, alters the way medical care is valued in malpractice cases where an insurance company provides compensation to an injured person.

Under the original version of House Bill 99, an injured person can recover the actual amount they paid but not the full amount billed. Cervantes said his amendment is intended to prevent constitutional challenges.

"The patient is entitled to recover damages they actually pay," Chandler told the committee. "We're trying to keep the cost of health care down and the cost of premiums down. We should be looking at keeping costs down."

A second amendment, also offered by Cervantes and approved by the committee, alters the definition of "occurrence," expanding the number of injuries that can be alleged in a single malpractice claim.

Cervantes, a trial lawyer who handles injury and medical malpractice cases, said the original bill would result in lengthy litigation as attorneys in malpractice cases dispute the number of injuries included in a single malpractice claim.

Chandler said the amendment "creates ambiguities" about the meaning of an occurrence.

"I think there's going to be more litigation over whether there's an occurrence or not, not less," she said.