Proyectos de ley › 90.ª Asamblea General

HF 201Retirado · SF 228 se hizo ley en su lugar · 28 de marzo de 2023

Relating to tort liability, including employer liability and noneconomic damages in civil actions involving commercial motor vehicles, and punitive or exemplary damages in civil actions generally

Presentado por el comité Judiciary de la Cámara

Temas:Courts & civil law

La misma legislación: HSB 114, SSB 1114, SF 228

Dónde está ahora

  1. Hecho: Presentado30 de enero de 2023
  2. Hecho: Subcomité30 de enero de 2023
  3. Hecho: Comité de la Cámara2 de febrero de 2023
  4. Hecho: Lo aprueba la Cámara28 de marzo de 202358–42
  5. Hecho: Comité del Senado30 de marzo de 2023
  6. Hecho: Lo aprueba el Senado22 de febrero de 202330–19
  7. Hecho: A gobernador(a)8 de mayo de 2023
  8. Hecho: Firmado como ley12 de mayo de 2023

SF 228 se hizo ley → La misma legislación se aprobó como SF 228, así que esta versión se dejó de lado. Ir a SF 228 ¿Qué es el embudo (funnel)?

Qué contiene

Resumen con IA If an employer of a commercial vehicle driver agrees that the driver was working at the time of an accident, the employer cannot be sued for how they hired or trained that employee. This law also limits the amount of money a person can receive for non-economic damages, like pain and suffering, to $1 million in these cases. These new rules do not apply if the driver was operating the vehicle while intoxicated. (Todavía no está traducido al español.)1

Lea la explicación oficial (en inglés)

This bill relates to tort liability. Under current law, an employer is liable for an employee’s negligence and may be held responsible for direct negligence relating to hiring, training, supervising, or trusting an employee, or other claims of direct negligence on part of the employee’s harmful conduct, subject to certain limitations contained in Code chapter 671A (negligent hiring —— limitations on liability) relating to convictions for public offenses, with certain exceptions. The bill provides that the liability of an employer who is a defendant in a civil action involving a commercial motor vehicle for damages caused by negligence of an employee acting within the scope and course of employment shall be based on respondeat superior if the employer makes certain stipulations. On motion of an employer, a trial court shall dismiss from the action any claim of the employer’s direct negligence in hiring, training, supervising, or trusting an employee, or other claim of direct negligence on the part of the employer for the employee’s harmful conduct, or other similar claims, if the employer stipulates that at the time of the event that caused the damages that the person whose negligence is the basis of the action is the employer’s employee and the employee was acting within the course and scope of employment with the employer. These provisions do not apply in circumstances involving an operating-while-intoxicated offense or a violation under federal regulations for operating under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or other substances. The bill limits the amount of noneconomic damages available against the owner or operator of a commercial motor vehicle for personal injury or death to $1 million regardless of the number of derivative claims, theories of liability, or defendants in the civil action. The secretary of state shall adjust the noneconomic damages award limitation on a biannual basis to account for inflation beginning on January 1, 2026, and every even-numbered year thereafter.136A (awards against health care providers).1 shall not be included in any initial claim for relief. A claim for punitive or exemplary damages may be allowed by amendment to the pleadings only after the exchange of initial disclosures and after the plaintiff establishes prima facie proof of a triable issue. Under current law and under the bill, the mere allegation or assertion of a claim for punitive damages cannot form the basis for discovery of the wealth or ability to respond in damages on behalf of the party from whom punitive damages are claimed until the claimant has established that sufficient admissible evidence exists to support a prima facie case establishing, by a preponderance of clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence, that the conduct of the defendant from which the claim arose constituted willful and wanton disregard for the rights or safety of another.

Cambiado después por las enmiendas H-1164, H-1163, S-3031, S-3030; vea Enmiendas.

Texto completo del proyecto (en inglés) · Qué cambió antes de aprobarse2

House subcommittee

Named January 30, 2023 (as HSB 114). On January 31, 2023 it recommended passage. Vote Total: 2-1.

Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part

1 comentario público por escrito a su subcomité: 2 de febrero de 2023 (1) · en el sitio de la Legislatura

Lo que cambia del Código de Iowa (Iowa Code)

Crea§668.12A§668.15A

Modifica§668A.1

Cómo funciona el Código3

Cabildeo

29 a favor · 8 en contra · 21 indecisos · Quiénes →

Family tree