Supreme Court Punts on Impact of Venue Rule Change

Yesterday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an order concerning the Civil Procedural Rules Committee's required two-year anniversary review of the medical malpractice venue rule change. Unfortunately, the Court provided no substantive results of the review. Instead, the Court merely deleted the two-year review requirement language from the rule. In the comment that accompanied its order, the Court noted that it had received commentary on behalf of medical professionals asserting that more time was needed to develop the data needed to review the impact of the venue rule change. Despite the comment about the need for more time, the Court declined to reference any potential future review. The Court closed by saying that it would “consider any future proposals as submitted though the Court’s usual rules committee processes.”

As background, the early 2000s saw Pennsylvania suffering from a medical malpractice insurance crisis that diverted resources away from health care delivery to pay for liability protection. Consequently, many health care services were curtailed, causing an emergency in the delivery of patient care. High risk specialty services were reduced and  maternity wards closed, some never to reopen. Many graduates of Pennsylvania’s medical schools left, or seriously considered leaving, Pennsylvania to practice medicine in states with more reasonable liability systems.   

In response, the Court, in 2003, issued a new civil procedure rule that required a medical liability case to be filed in the county where the cause of action arose. For twenty years, the medical liability venue rule worked well, and Pennsylvania’s liability environment improved. Then, in 2022, the Court rescinded the rule effective January 1, 2023.

Recission of the rule immediately resulted in significant increases in the number of medical malpractice cases being filed in plaintiff-friendly Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties. However, the Court included in the rule a requirement that the impact of the rule be reviewed after two years by the rules committee. That review came due in January 2025. Until yesterday, the Court and rules committee had remained silent on the status of the review.

The failure of the rules committee to issue a substantive report is a significant disappointment as the data would reflect the negative impact wrought by the 2022 rule change. PAMED will continue to work with aligned organizations and the legislature to develop a solution that restores a rational and reasonable venue scheme for Pennsylvania medical malpractice cases.