Samiksha Jaiswal (Editor)

Institute for Legal Reform

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit

The US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR), founded in 1998, is a separately incorporated affiliate of the United States Chamber of Commerce. The organization advocates for civil justice reform, commonly referred to as tort reform.

Contents

The president of the organization is Lisa A. Rickard, and the group's website says it is the "country's most influential and successful advocate for civil justice reform, both in the U.S. and abroad."

Stances on issues

ILR advocates for a number of state and federal policy positions related to civil justice reform. These include policies to provide more transparency in the asbestos bankruptcy trust system, class action lawsuit reform, spotlighting third party litigation funding and lawsuit lending, reforms to the False Claims Act and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, among others.

Research

ILR regularly releases studies and research reports that track with the organization’s policy positions. Following is a listing of the group’s research reports from the past several years:

2016

  • Disconnects & Double-Dipping: The Case for Asbestos Bankruptcy Trust Transparency in Virginia
  • Big Bucks and Local Lawyers: The Increasing Use of Contingency Fee Lawyers by Local Governments
  • Enforcement Gone Amok: The Many Faces of Over-Enforcement in the United States
  • DOJ's New Threshold for "Cooperation": Challenges Posed by the Yates Memo and USAM Revisions
  • Before the Flood: An Outline of Oversight Options for Third Party Litigation Funding in England & Wales
  • Insights & Inconsistencies: Lessons from the Garlock Trust Claims
  • 2015

  • The Waiting Game: Delay and Non-Disclosure of Asbestos Trust Claims
  • Trial Lawyer Marketing: Broadcast, Search and Social Strategies
  • A Perilous Patchwork: Data Privacy and Civil Liability in the Era of the Data Breach
  • MDL Proceedings: Eliminating the Chaff
  • Constitutional Constraints: Provisions Limiting Excessive Government Fines
  • Should I Stay or Should I Go? A Forum Non Conveniens Checklist
  • The Trial Lawyer Underground: Covertly Lobbying the Executive Branch
  • 2015 Lawsuit Climate Survey: Ranking the States
  • 101 Ways to Improve State Legal Systems: A User's Guide to Promoting Fair and Effective Civil Justice
  • As Kiobel Turns Two: How the Supreme Court is Leaving the Details to Lower Courts
  • Enforcement Slush Funds: Funding Federal and State Agencies with Enforcement Proceeds
  • Painting an Unsettling Landscape: Canadian Class Actions 2011-2014
  • State Liability Rankings Study

    Every few years, ILR releases the results of a Harris Poll survey that ranks the 50 states, from best to worst, on their individual legal climates. ILR calls this the “Lawsuit Climate: Ranking the States” report.

    The survey focuses on perceptions of the state liability system by asking respondents to grade the following elements:

  • Overall treatment of tort and contract litigation
  • Having and enforcing meaningful venue requirements
  • Treatment of class action suits and mass consolidation suits
  • Damages
  • Timeliness of summary judgment or dismissal
  • Discovery
  • Scientific and technical evidence
  • Judges’ impartiality
  • Judges’ competence
  • Juries’ fairness
  • In 2015, ILR released the study at a Chicago, Illinois press conference with Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner. That report showed that Delaware was ranked #1, and West Virginia ranked last, or 50th.

    Faces of Lawsuit Abuse campaign

    Since 2007, ILR also has run a public education campaign it calls, “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.” This campaign features videos of small businesses, communities and families who have been sued, as well as videos and a regularly updated online poll that allows people to vote for the “Most Ridiculous Lawsuits.”

    At the end of each year, ILR releases the Top Ten Most Ridiculous Lawsuits of the year, which features the year’s ten most popular stories based on polling data.

    Criticisms

    Critics of ILR and other tort reform organizations argue that the organizations limit the access of ordinary citizens to be compensated for harms done to them by corporations through faulty products and/or harmful services. Critics argue that such interest groups do not promote judicial efficiency, legal ethics, or any other public purpose, but merely protect corporations from the consequences of their misdeeds.

    References

    Institute for Legal Reform Wikipedia