PCCJR Voices Concern over $200 Million Verdict

HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform (PCCJR) today expressed deep concern over a Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court’s decision to uphold a staggering $200 million medical malpractice verdict in Hagans v. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, (No. 536 EDA 2024)—half of which was attributed to a life care plan that significantly exceeds commonly accepted standards for reasonable cost of care. This verdict, handed down in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, is the largest medical malpractice verdict in Pennsylvania’s history.

“This decision raises serious questions about the proportionality and fairness of damage awards in complex medical liability cases,” PCCJR Executive Director Curt Schroder said. “A $100 million life care plan is not based in reality and places an unsustainable financial burden on hospitals and providers already operating under intense economic pressure.”

Adding to the concern is the $80 million awarded in non-economic damages — an amount for which there are no objective standards, statutory guidelines, or meaningful judicial benchmarks.

“The lack of guardrails surrounding non-economic damages allows for enormous variability and subjectivity – laying the groundwork for an increase in nuclear verdicts,” said Schroder. “Without a framework to guide courts and juries, awards like this create serious issues for insurability, increase unpredictability, and strain an already fragile health care system.”

The appellate court’s approval of this portion of the verdict only exacerbates those concerns and underscores the need for reform. The Commonwealth has already received the dubious ranking of being the nation’s worst judicial hellhole – cases like this only serve to further cement that distinction.

Also troubling, Schroder noted, is the court’s apparent acceptance of a novel “team liability” theory, which permitted the plaintiff to proceed without establishing negligence on the part of any specific individual provider. The Court’s decision appeared to rest, in part, on defense counsel’s reference to the health care professionals working as a “team.” “Traditionally, Pennsylvania law requires a finding of negligence against an identified actor before vicarious liability can be imposed,” Schroder explained.

Schroder warned that expanding liability, particularly in cases involving large institutions, could have wide-ranging consequences for Pennsylvania’s health care system, including increased litigation, skyrocketing insurance premiums, and the potential closure of critical care facilities.

“PCCJR respects the role of juries and the courts,” Schroder added. “However, it is essential that appellate courts ensure verdicts remain grounded in well-established legal standards. Protecting access to care and the long-term sustainability of our healthcare institutions depends on a balanced and consistent approach to liability and damages.”

###

The Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform is a 501(c )(6), not-for-profit, nonpartisan advocacy organization comprised of a diverse group of organizations and individuals committed to bringing fairness to Pennsylvania’s courts by raising awareness of civil justice issues and advocating for legal reform. Additional information is available at http://www.paforciviljusticereform.org.

Curt Schroder
Executive Director
Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform
717-461-3577