Secrets That Can Hurt People : SB 711 needs only the governor’s signature to become law

Let’s be clear about one thing. Efforts by opponents of SB 711, which passed the Legislature last week, to cast this bill as an attempt by trial lawyers to generate more litigation and to add yet another burden to California businesses are unfair. SB 711, now awaiting Gov. Pete Wilson’s signature, is a reasonable and overdue measure to protect consumers from needless injuries caused by foreseeable dangers.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), would limit--but not entirely eliminate--agreements between tort litigants that attempt to keep secret evidence of product defects, environmental hazards or financial fraud. Defendants in tort lawsuits frequently require sealing evidence of such defect dangers as a condition of settlement--something to which plaintiffs must agree or forfeit compensation for their injuries.

The opponents’ line is essentially doomsday-ish. They contend that the bill will increase the costs of litigation, slow resolution by discouraging settlements and, most seriously, force disclosure of vital trade secrets, thereby poisoning the state’s already soured business climate.

That’s nonsense, of course. Supporters, including the California Judges Assn., consumer and health advocacy groups, point out that courts would still be able to seal legitimate trade secrets and other confidential business or personal information.

Don’t forget that a defectively designed product does not cause injury just once, but over and over again. Agreements that protect this sort of trade secret do not serve the best interests of California’s businesses or its people.

SB 711 faced an uphill battle in the Legislature, where it has been opposed by the California Manufacturers Assn. But both houses narrowly approved the measure; most Legislators saw the measure for what it is--an effort to curb repetitive litigation resulting from preventable dangers.

Rightly, Texas, Florida and New York have already adopted statewide rules similar to those proposed here. Judges in San Diego and Santa Clara counties have limited tort secrecy agreements by local rule. Wilson should extend their example statewide.