The History of No-Fault: Voters Say "No" to So-Called "Reforms" 13 Out of 13 Times
Justice for you starts with a lawyer who listens
Alexander Law Group, LLP is a nationally recognized, award-winning personal injury law firm with offices in San Jose and San Francisco, California. The attorneys of the Alexander Law Group have decades of experience with outstanding results litigating difficult and complex cases against major insurance companies, large corporations, public and government entities. Call us now at 888.777.1776 for a Free Case Evaluation.

The History of No-Fault: Voters Say "No" to So-Called "Reforms" 13 Out of 13 Times

California (1996)

Prop. 200's no-fault system for auto accidents would have eliminated Californians' right to trial by jury and their ability to collect non-economic damages. It was defeated 65-35 percent. Prop. 201 would have limited the right of investors to sue those who defraud them in stock swindles. It was defeated 59-41 percent. Prop. 202 would have arbitrarily capped plaintiff's attorney's fees at 15 percent of any early settlement offer. It was defeated 51-49 percent.

Arizona (1994)

Prop. 103 would have overturned the Arizona Constitution's guarantee against restrictions on citizens' right to recover damages and allowed the legislature to pass caps on awards and limit the right to trial by jury. It was defeated 61-39 percent. Prop. 301 would have required periodic payments, allowed insurers to have unlimited access to hospital/physician records and denied damages to plaintiffs who were more than 50 percent at fault. It was defeated 62-38 percent.

Michigan (1994)

Prop. C, identical to Prop. B measure placed on the 1992 ballot, would have limited auto insurance medical benefits. It was defeated 61-39 percent.

Michigan (1992)

Prop. B would have limited medical benefits under auto insurance policies to $1 million, but would have allowed the insurance industry to sell additional coverage for expenses exceeding $1 million to policyholders. It was defeated 62-38 percent.

Arizona (1990)

Prop. 105 would have changed the Arizona Constitution and permitted limits on the right to sue and collect damages. It was defeated 83-17 percent. Prop. 203 would have allowed consumers to opt into a no-fault auto accident system. It was defeated 85-15 percent.

California (1988)

Prop. 101 would have reduced bodily injury liability rates in auto cases by 50 percent and limited damages and contingency fees. It was defeated 86-14 percent. Prop. 104 would have enacted a no-fault auto insurance system. It was defeated 75-25 percent. Prop. 106 would have limited contingency fees in all tort cases to 25 percent of the first $50,000 of an award; 15 percent of the next $50,000; and 10 percent of any amount above $100,000. It was defeated 53-47 percent.

Florida (1988)

Amendment 10 would have arbitrarily capped non-economic damages in all tort cases at $100,000. Non-economic damages include jury awards for intangible harms such as blindness, sterility and gross disfigurement. It was defeated 57-43 percent.

If you or a family member have been wrongfully injured call us at 1.888.777.1776 or use this form, delays can hurt your case, so please don't hesitate to contact us.

While the results that we have obtained in other cases and our clients' testimonials do not guarantee, promise or predict the outcome of your case, we do promise to do our very best for you in your case.

Copyright © 1994 - 2018 Alexander Law Group, LLP. All rights reserved.