Mike Thompson: “I think this bill is a lot better than when we started. There remains one area, of course, where we have substantial…”

“I think this bill is a lot better than when we started. There remains one area, of course, where we have substantial disagreement, and that has to do with where the lawsuits are going to be brought. The underlying bill still has a bifurcated system where some suits can be brought to State court and some in Federal court. I think that is the main thing the Frist-Breaux-Jeffords amendment tries to address. We all can read the handwriting on the wall. I think we know how this is going to go. But it is very important our colleagues understand what we are doing. With regard to the underlying bill, there is a presupposition, apparently, that a client will walk into a lawyer's office with a tag around his neck saying, I'm a State suit, or, I'm a Federal suit. That will not be the case. There will be many cases that are mixed. Some will have to do with coverage denial, some will have to do with medically reviewable claims, some will be more of a contract case, some will be more of a tort case. Arguably, it could go in either court. Some will go to Federal court and the defendant will object and say, no, you belong in State court, and the judge will rule. Then there will be an appeal in that venue. Then that will be determined, and then it will go possibly to the opposite court. In other words, there will be litigation at one or more levels in order to determine where you are going to litigate.”