Prop. 103 and the 'Insurance Mess'

I find it almost funny and very righteous for the insurance companies to launch a legal assault on Proposition 103 on the grounds that it is unconstitutional to require insurance companies to roll back their rates when the ballot propositions that the insurance companies financed would have established no-fault auto insurance, which would have limited pain and suffering damages and contingency fees in auto accident cases, and limited contingency fees in all tort actions.

It would appear that the insurance companies are willing to inflict what they would allege to be unconstitutional limitations on consumers as well as lawyers, but when it is turned around on them so that they have to somewhat limit or roll back their own rates, they see it as an assault on their constitutional rights.


Los Angeles

Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times
EDITION: California | U.S. & World