Latest news with #HB301
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Florida Legislature OKs $27M in claims bill payments
Rep. Fiona McFarland says she'll file another sovereign immunity bill for the 2026 session. (Photo via the Florida House) Lawmakers during this past session refused to make changes to the state's heavily criticized and often politicized claims bill process, but at the same time signed off on $27 million worth of payments in lawsuits that had been filed against local governments. A Florida Phoenix review of the 2025 session shows the Legislature passed nine claims bills totaling $26,938,364 in liability that will be passed on to local governments or entities acting on their behalf. The City of Gainesville is responsible for the largest claims bill (HB 6251), which will allow the payment of $10.8 million against the city for the negligence of a utility employee who ran a stop sign on his way home from work. The accident left Jacob Rodgers paralyzed from the waist down. The bill analysis shows that of the total claim, $2.6 million-plus will go to his attorneys and another $137,500 will be paid to lobbyists who, according to the lobbyist disclosure system, are Matthew Forrest and Adrian Lukas with the firm Ballard Partners. Conversely, the smallest claim bill passed during the 2025 session (SB 22) was for $200,000 and involved Joe Dimaggio Children's Hospital and the death of a seven-year-old-child, referred to in the record as E.E.M. The hospital, part of the South Broward Hospital District, did not oppose the claims bill, filed on behalf of Eric Miles Jr. and Jennifer Miles, E.E.M's parents. Claims bills are required because Florida enjoys sovereign immunity for state and local governments as a legal sovereign from civil lawsuits filed in state court. The state does, however, allow negligence claims against itself and its subdivisions — agencies, cities, counties, and public hospitals — within limits. Set in statute, those limits are $200,000 per person and $$300,000 per occurrence. Injured parties can sue for damages and collect within those limits. But jury awards beyond those limits cannot be collected without the Legislature first approving a claims bill. The claims bill process is lengthy and allows the defendant to challenge a jury verdict — two reasons why, Rep. Fiona McFarland says, she has twice filed legislation to change the law. Her latest effort, HB 301, was one of the most heavily lobbied bills in Tallahassee this session, drawing 214 lobbyist registrations. The original bill would have increased the caps to $1 million per person and $3 million per occurrence. She later agreed to tag on an amendment that increased the caps to $500,000 per person and $1 million per incident for claims accruing on or after Oct. 1 and $600,000 per person and $1.1 million per occurrence for claims that accrue on or after Oct. 1, 2030. While the amended bill passed the House by comfortable margins it never was considered by the Senate. 'I'm very disappointed,' McFarland told the Florida Phoenix as the session drew to an end. She promised she'd sponsor the bill during the 2026 session. While McFarland pushed the bill to change what she called an arbitrary process, a bid to raise the limits was opposed by local governments and public hospitals. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill restricting teen social media use moves forward in N.C. legislature
A bill in North Carolina that would restrict social media access for some teenagers is on its way to the Senate. House Bill 301 would require 14-year-olds and 15-year-olds to show parental consent to access popular apps like Instagram and TikTok. The bill would also require social media platforms to delete accounts operated by any user younger than 14. HB301 specifies that websites will need to include age verification for users. The proposed law says third-party companies that are used for age verification will be required to keep data anonymous and not retain any information after the age is verified. While the bill has advanced through the House, similar bans in other states have been hard to enforce. HB301 was introduced and sponsored exclusively by Republican representatives, but the bill received wide bipartisan support when it went to a floor vote in the House. (VIDEO: Travelers with no Real ID can fly for now. What to know at Charlotte Douglas)
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sovereign immunity caps lowered in bill's last stop before House debate
Rep. Fiona McFarland debating her sovereign immunity bill on April 8, 2025, in the House Judiciary Committee. (Photo via the Florida Channel) A highly contentious battle over how much money people injured by the government can collect in lawsuits continues to play out in the Florida Legislature. A bill (HB 301) dealing with the state's sovereign immunity limits advanced out of its final committee stop in the House with three 'no' votes but not before the House Judiciary Committee tagged on an amendment that significantly limits the amounts of recoverable damages planned and phases them in over five years. Under the amended bill, the sovereign immunity limits would be increased to $500,000 per person and $1 million per incident for claims accruing on or after Oct. 1, 2025. The caps increase to $600,000 per person and $1.1 million per occurrence for claims that accrue on or after Oct. 1, 2030. The existing sovereign immunity caps are set at $200,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence and were last altered in 2010. The original bill would have increased the caps to $1 million per person and $3 million per occurrence. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Bill sponsor Rep. Fiona McFarland offered the amendment as the Legislature enters the second half of its 60-day regular legislative session. The Senate has yet to consider the companion bill. McFarland said the Senate has not agreed to her amendment. I don't have a perfect solution. I just have an improvement on our current state. – Rep. Fiona McFarland McFarland's call to lower the caps swayed at least one member of the committee Tuesday to vote for the bill: Rep. Rachel Plakon, who thanked McFarland 'for working with both sides of this issue.' But others lamented the caps being lowered. 'Why don't we just leave it at this: I'm sad to see that you felt pressure that you had to reduce the amount, especially in modern times, to make this pass. I'm sorry,' Rep. Danny Alvarez said during committee debate on the bill. McFarland's amendment didn't alter other provisions meant to change how the sovereign immunity process works. The bill still has language allowing political subdivisions to settle cases beyond the sovereign immunity limits without having to obtain legislative approval. It also prohibits insurance companies from conditioning payment of settlements on enactment of claims bills. Sovereign immunity affects a large swath of special interests, from schools, cities, counties, public hospitals, police, and firefighters and people injured by those entities. Not surprisingly, the bill attracted 203 lobbyist registrations and is the most tracked bill among LobbyTools subscribers. Sovereign immunity stems from the Latin phrase 'rex non potest peccare,' which translates to 'the king cannot commit a legal wrong.' In legal terms, it refers to the state's authority to exempt itself as a legal sovereign from civil lawsuits, although the state does allow negligence claims against itself and its subdivisions — agencies, cities, counties, and public hospitals — within limits. Injured parties can sue for damages and collect within the liability thresholds established by law, but if they win awards in excess of the limits they must go to the Legislature in the form of what's called a claims bill to collect. But the claims bill process is lengthy. It also allows the defendant to challenge the jury verdict at the legislative level. Once a claims bill is filed, each chamber's presiding officer refers it to a special master, who essentially reconsiders the jury's recommendation. Claims bills also go before House and Senate committees that consider special masters' recommendations. Ultimately, the bills must pass in both chambers. It's not unusual for claims bills to take years to pass, if ever. 'We do have concerns with the provision of the bill that would not allow an insurance company to require a claims bill to be passed, and for a claims bill not to be required in certain circumstances,' Florida League of Cities Deputy General Counsel David Cruz said, opposing the bill during public debate. 'We feel there's value in the claims bill process, and so we would encourage the Legislature to continue the claims bill process.' Cruz said McFarland's amendment to lower the limits 'put the bill in a better direction' but added, 'We are concerned that the caps have to be placed at the right limit.' City of Belleair Bluffs Commissioner Karen Rafferty argued the limits should be increased to $300,000 per individual and $500,000 per incident. From there, the caps could be lifted every two to three years by the consumer price index (CPI). McFarland in her closing testimony said she doesn't know the 'right number' for the sovereign immunity limits or even that the limits agreed to in 2010 were right. 'I don't know what the right number ultimately is. Perhaps we'll continue to negotiate it in the chamber and with our partners across the rotunda and get to some amount that we can all feel okay about,' she said. McFarland then doubled down on the changes to the sovereign immunity process. 'We can do numbers all day. We are the appropriators. We understand how to do state budgets. But we don't as a body understand how to dispose of judicial matters, and that's what the claims bill process asks us to. I don't have a perfect solution. I just have an improvement on our current state.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House budget chair orders review of local budgets during sovereign immunity debate
House Budget Committee Chair Rep. Lawrence McClure (Photo via Florida House of Representatives) State. Rep. Lawrence McClure on Thursday called for a review of county budgets — the results of which, he said, will help guide the legislative debate on appropriate payout limits for people injured by the government or its entities. His comments came during debate on HB 301 by Rep. Fiona McFarland, which cleared the House Budget Committee with three 'no' votes. The bill heads to the Judiciary Committee next. The Senate companion, SB 1570, has been referred to three committees but has yet to be scheduled for a hearing. The bill would increase the state's sovereign immunity limits in damages claims, taking them from $200,000 per person to $1 million and from $300,000 per occurrence to $3 million. The caps were last adjusted in 2010. The bill is opposed by the Florida League of Cities, Florida Association of Counties, the Safety Net Hospital Alliance, and insurance industry representatives, among others, who argue the proposed new limitations (a 400% increase over the existing cap for individuals and a 900% increase per occurrence) are too high. To determine new limits that strike a balance between those who've been injured and local municipalities, McClure said, the State Administration and Budget Subcommittee should 'get into these local budgets' — examine their bottom-line increases, spending increases, and 'most importantly' the annual legislative funding requests cities and counties routinely make of legislators to fund things such as parks, improvements at local emergency operation centers, and hospital programs. McClure asked that the subcommittee review 14 years of information. 'I think in that, we'll find the right balance we are looking for,' McClure said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX We are more than willing, like I said, to come to the table and figure out what the appropriate number is. – Florida League of Cities Deputy General Counsel Sovereign immunity stems from the Latin phrase 'rex non potest peccare,' which translates to 'the king cannot commit a legal wrong.' In legal terms, it refers to the state's authority to exempt itself as a legal sovereign from civil lawsuits, although the state does allow negligence claims against itself and its subdivisions — agencies, cities, counties, and public hospitals — within limits. Injured parties can sue for damages and collect within the liability thresholds established by law, but if they win awards in excess of the limits, they must go to the Legislature seeking what's called a claims bill to collect the payment. McClure's remarks followed comments made by some committee members who worried that the proposed caps could be too high. The members were repeating concerns raised by Florida League of Cities Deputy General Counsel and lobbyist David Cruz during public testimony on the bill. Cruz said the proposed increases come at a time when the Legislature also is considering limiting ways that local governments can collect taxes on property and from businesses. The tandem, he said, threatens to limit cities' revenues while increasing their costs. 'And in the middle, we would be left with a significant impact to our cities. So, I would just ask, please balance the scales accordingly,' Cruz said. Cities understand the need to increase the caps, Cruz said, but he suggested the Legislature consider doubling them to $400,00 per person and $600,00 per person, as it did in 2024. When McClure asked whether the League of Cities supported the 2024 bill (which ultimately died) Cruz acknowledged it had not. The association supported adjusting the limits to $300,000/$500,000, instead. McClure pressed Cruz as to why the League of Cities would support the $400,000/$600,000 limits now, but Cruz didn't directly answer the question. Instead, he pitched compromise. 'We are more than willing, like I said, to come to the table and figure out what the appropriate number is. Whether we start at 400/600 or 300/500, we are happy to engage in those conversations,' Cruz said. 'We just strongly feel that 1 million/3 million is too much.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House panel OKs new lawsuit limits in heavily lobbied sovereign immunity bill
Rep. Fiona McFarland is sponsoring legislation to increase sovereign immunity limits. The bill has drawn more than 100 lobbyist registrations. (Photo by Florida House) People injured by the state government or any of its subdivisions would have an easier time suing for damages and could receive larger payouts under a bill approved by a House panel Wednesday morning. In a near-unanimous vote, the House Civil Justice Subcommittee voted to approve HB 301, by Rep. Fiona McFarland. The bill increases the state's sovereign immunity limits, taking them from $200,000 per person to $1 million and from $300,000 per occurrence to $3 million. Moreover, the bill makes clear that political subdivisions can settle cases beyond those limits without having to obtain advance approval in the form of a special legislative act. It also prohibits insurance policies from conditioning payment of settlements on the enactment of a claims bill. All changes that lobbyist took aim at during the meeting. Sovereign immunity stems from the Latin phrase 'rex non potest peccare,' which translates to 'the king cannot commit a legal wrong.' In legal terms, it refers to the state's authority to exempt itself as a legal sovereign from civil lawsuits, although the state does allow negligence claims against itself and its subdivisions — agencies, cities, counties, and public hospitals — within limits. Injured parties can sue for damages and collect within the liability thresholds established by law, but if they win awards in excess of the limits they must go to the Legislature in the form of what's called a claims bill to collect the payment. The claims bill process is lengthy and allows the defendant to challenge a jury verdict. Once a claims bill is filed, each chamber's presiding officer refers it to a special master, who essentially reconsiders the jury's recommendation. Claims bills also go before House and Senate committees that consider special masters' recommendations. Ultimately, the bills must pass in both chambers. It's not unusual for claims bills to take years to pass, if ever. I'm pleased as punch when I walked around the Capitol yesterday, when I saw every local government, every hospital, I think the entire lobby corps was walking around yesterday, and this might be the only bill that the House is hearing this week, so I feel very special. – Rep. Fiona McFarland There are more than 100 lobbyist registrations on the bill, which is opposed by the Florida League of Cities, the Florida Association of Counties, the Safety Net Hospital Alliance of Florida, and school boards across the state. Conversely, the bill is supported by the Florida Justice Association, which represents the state's trial attorneys. McFarland joked about the amount of lobbying taking place on the bill during her closing remarks Wednesday morning. 'I'm pleased as punch when I walked around the Capitol yesterday, when I saw every local government, every hospital, I think the entire lobby corps was walking around yesterday, and this might be the only bill that the House is hearing this week, so I feel very special,' she said. 'But I'm glad you're hearing their voices. I'm hearing voices too,' she said, rattling off a long list of names of Florida residents who have been injured by the government and its political subdivisions who have filed claims bills to receive their payments. 'I hear those voices.' McFarland, who filed similar legislation last year, promised she would work with interested parties on the legislation as it moves through the committee process. The bill heads to the House Budget and Judiciary committees next. McFarland said she was willing to discuss the new proposed sovereign immunity limits but wasn't quite sure where they should be set. She won't negotiate on one key point though — that the new limits won't apply retroactively. Currently, the bill has an Oct. 1 effective date, although McFarland said she would be willing to reconsider that. Several lobbyists on Wednesday testified that the $1 million and $3 million limits would jack up their insurance costs and those increases would ultimately have to be borne by the local taxpayer. Governmental entities that are self-insured, and therefore on the hook to pay the claim out of their reserves, would be forced to request a special appropriation from the Legislature to cover the increased liability limits. McFarland, though, noted that cities, counties, and other governmental entities routinely seek funding requests for special projects and that she herself has filed an appropriations request this year for solar panels. 'I'm going to fight really strong for that. My local government tells me they need it. But I would also like to fight really strongly for each of the claims bills that come up. ' Panhandle Area Educational Consortium lobbyist Bob Harris said increasing the limits will boost the number of lawsuits filed against his clients, school boards in small counties in that region. 'We know there will be more cases. If this happens, you increase the rates to $1 million and $3 million. We call it the pot-of-gold-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow syndrome. If you increase the size of the pot of gold, more people are going to go for that. And again, we know more cases will result in more cost for our school districts,' Harris said. An attorney who defends the school districts when sued, Harris described a number of lawsuits on his desk that have been filed against the school districts, involving softball players suing their coach for not giving them enough play time or a football player suing his coach for penalizing him for missing practices. Another parent is suing a school district for negligence after their child 'got his butt beat' in a physical education class. 'It's those kind of lawsuits that we're facing. And if you increase these caps and the amount that's being recommended, I don't know how we possibly can afford that,' he said. In addition to opposing the increase in caps, Harris said that authorizing governmental entities to settle claims beyond the sovereign immunity limits would eviscerate the idea of limits altogether. 'The one thing I can negotiate with when I'm dealing with plaintiff lawyers on these issues is the cap, the sovereign immunity caps. If you take those away, I don't have that as leverage. The claims are going to be four or five, six million. Every single one of them. And that's a problem.' The existing caps were set by the Legislature in the early 1970s and last adjusted in 2010. Florida League of Cities lobbyist David Cruz recommended that the Legislature tie the caps to the consumer price index, which, he said, would yield new limits of $280,000 per individual and $420,000 per occurrence. The Legislature also could review other states' sovereign immunity laws and adjust Florida's accordingly, he suggested, noting that Texas limits are set at $250,000 per individual and $500,000 per occurrence. Another option, Cruz said, would be to mirror the caps that were proposed in House and Senate legislation last year, which ranged from a low of $300,000 per person to a high of $600,000 per incident. Cruz stressed, though, that the requirement for a claims bill process should remain intact. 'There is value in going to that special master process,' Cruz said. Miami attorney Eric Tinstman, a Florida Justice Association member, said the concept of sovereign immunity is 'anti-American.' 'I can think of no more anti-American statement than the king can do no wrong,' he said. Tinstman defended the portion of the bill that allows a governmental entity to settle a claim without first going through the claims bill process and having a special master reconsider the case and make its own findings and facts, he told the committee. 'A special master is how Europe does it. They don't have juries. They don't have their people, their community, to decide what the damages are, what the liability is. It's all special masters,' he said. 'We like the way our country works. We leave it to our community, juries, and judges who are appointed and elected by the people, not some special master.' Tinstman views the $1 million and $3 million caps as reasonable. In response to adjusting the sovereign immunity limits by inflation, Tinstman said, the adjustment should be made to the initial $50,000 cap in 1973 not the 2010 cap. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
