South Carolina’s worthwhile attempt at liability lawfare reform
One underappreciated but worthy reform enacted by several states in recent years has come in the form of curtailing the excesses of liability lawfare, also known as tort and injury law.
With a complex web of injury and liability case law and loose rules on legal advertising, lawsuits against insurance companies, restaurants, and even rideshare operators have proliferated over the past decade, coinciding with mounting insurance premiums for both consumers and business owners as plans have shifted to try to shore up reserves.
Because most firms and companies would rather avoid costly trials with drawn-out hearings, witness testimonies, and plaintiff attorney attacks, no matter how serious or frivolous the liability claim, many choose to settle rather than have their reputation sullied.
While there are plenty of cases of documented harms, our work at the Centro di scelta dei consumatori ha documented time and again where this liability lawfare has been exploited by an entrepreneurial class of attorneys who use the court system as a battering ram for large payouts rather than a tool of justice.
As frivolous claims choke up courts and eat into the legal budgets of small, medium, and large businesses who must respond to liability claims, consumers are forced to foot the bill for higher insurance premiums and legal costs, no matter how warranted or legitimate the claims are.
Heeding this call, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster has thrown his support behind comprehensive liability reform in S. 244, following the steps of fellow GOP governors in Georgia and Florida.
Though rates were skyrocketing in recent years, insurance markets in Florida have stabilized after the passage of HB 837 in 2023, its comprehensive tort liability package, while significant reforms in Georgia are poised to do the same in Senate Bill 68 and Senate Bill 69.
Advocates of these liability reforms rightly point out that more defined rules for fault and liability benefit and better compensate true victims while punishing bad actors who seek to exploit the system.
South Carolina’s S. 244
Curbing lawsuit abuse has become a priority for state legislators, as liability claims are stimato to cost $3,181 per household per year, or nearly 2.5% of total GDP.
The modest reforms in S. 244 seek to balance the exploitation of liability lawsuits by restricting certain parts of state law:
- It introduces a “modified comparative negligence” standard, limiting the ability for a plaintiff to recover damages even if they are mostly at fault.
- It requires courts to assign fault fairly and proportionally to all parties
- It amends rules of liability related to the serving of alcohol and those who knowingly ride with an intoxicated driver, while requiring further training for all alcohol servers
- It limits bad faith insurance claims that are likely fraudulent or exaggerated, particularly in car accidents
A worthwhile reform
Efforts at liability lawfare reform are not about protecting larger firms or shielding wrongdoers from justice. It’s just the opposite. By restoring an appropriate balance in the courts, it limits costs for those who’ve done nothing wrong while protecting avenues to accountability for those who deserve justice and compensation.
Liability lawfare is not a victimless pursuit—they drive up costs for everyone. Businesses face higher insurance premiums who then pass those costs to consumers. This effect is present throughout the entire chain of goods and services that consumers rely on.
By refining damage caps and clarifying liability rules—covering civil fault, alcohol-related claims, and insurance regulations—S. 244 protects entrepreneurs and families from legal overreach. It’s a shield against the “deep pocket” chases that clog courts and drain resources, fostering a legal system where justice, not jackpots, prevails.
Opposition will be fierce
Though South Carolina’s reforms are common sense and will be beneficial to the state’s consumers and the firms that serve them, it is clear that vested interests that benefit from the current system will oppose them.
The opposition, led by trial lawyers, will continue to be fierce. Billboards and ads are already flooding the state, warning that these reforms allow insurers to dodge claims without lowering rates and for corporate abuse to run unabated.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Where there reforms have been tried, they have worked, and they have helped to reduce costs, and to allow the truly harmed to seek justice when they’ve been wronged.
If South Carolinians want to restore decency and true justice to their courts while giving their citizens the tools to defend themselves, these reforms are worthwhile and should be pursued.
Yaël Ossowski writes on legal reform and is deputy director at the Consumer Choice Center.
