LEGAL AND PRACTICAL SUBROGATION ISSUES IN THE U.S.A.

the product met federal or state standards. Georgia has strengthened expert witness rulesand adopted the Daubert standard in civil cases which has placed restrictions on theability of an expert witness to render opinions at trial.Tort reform legislation withrespect to evidentiary issues is intended to limit the ability of a plaintiff to establish aclaim. None of the legislation has expanded or liberalized the rules of evidence, and thussubrogating insurers can expect that this type of tort reform will negatively impact theirsubrogation rights.The purpose of tort reform in the United States is primarily devoted to theregulation, control and restriction of personal injury actions. However, statutes of repose,imposition of several liability, and evidentiary limitations do not distinguish a personalinjury plaintiff from a subrogating insurer. The measure of damages sought by thesubrogating insurer may not be the subject of damage caps or limitations, but the abilityto pursue those damages is affected directly by tort reform. As noted at the outset, it isnot the intent of this paper to criticize or extol tort reform in the United States, but thereis no question that tort reform has limited and in some instances eliminated the rights of asubrogating insurer.MP3 20204330.1-21 -