SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF
MISSISSIPPI HOUSE BILL 13 – CIVIL JUSTICE REFORM
Venue and Joinder Reform: Plaintiffs often seek to file lawsuits in places some plaintiffs’
lawyers call “magic jurisdictions” – the same places that the American Tort Reform Association
has called “judicial hellholes.” In Mississippi, parties have been joined in lawsuits purely for the
purpose of getting jurisdiction in state court and venue in certain counties. Mississippi’s joinder
and venue rules have allowed mass torts to be filed by thousands of non-Mississippi plaintiffs.
Local residents have been forced to spend time in jury service deciding controversies that should
have been resolved elsewhere. Local litigants have been forced to wait in line while the claims
of earlier-filing plaintiffs from outside the state were decided.
Mississippi House Bill 3 (“HB 13”), adopted passed by the legislature on June 3, 2004,
amends Mississippi law to bring it more into line with the rules in other states. Under HB 13, a
civil suit may be filed in the county where the defendant resides (in the case of a corporation, the
county of its principal place of business) or in the county where a “substantial alleged act or
omission occurred or where a substantial event that caused the injury occurred.” If venue cannot
be asserted against a nonresident defendant under the above criteria, the plaintiff may file in the
county where he or she lives. Venue must be proper for each plaintiff.
If a claim would be more properly decided in another state, the trial court shall dismiss
the claim or action. If the claim would be more properly decided in another county within
Mississippi, the case shall be transferred to the appropriate county. A case may not be dismissed
until all defendants agree to waive the right to raise a statute of limitations defense in all other
states in which the claim would not have been time-barred at the time the claim was filed in
Mississippi. This will allow plaintiffs a fair opportunity to refile their cases in other states
without fear that the statutes of limitations may expire on their claims while they are pending in
Mississippi.
$1 Million Cap on Noneconomic Damages: Noneconomic damages cover nonmonetary
losses, such as pain and suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, mental
anguish, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium, injury to reputation, humiliation
or embarrassment. In a lengthy special session in 2002, the legislature enacted changes to
Mississippi’s medical malpractice laws, including the establishment of a $500,000 cap on
noneconomic damages.
HB 13 maintains the current medical malpractice cap at $500,000, and extends a cap on
noneconomic damages to other civil defendants. Under HB 13, noneconomic damages are
capped at $1 million for any civil defendant (other than a health care liability defendant). The
cap applies to any civil claim filed on or after September 1, 2004.
Innocent Product Seller Liability Reform: Mississippi law currently allows plaintiffs
to join local product sellers (e.g., wholesalers, distributors, and retailers) in tort actions for the
purpose of trying to defeat federal diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction over claims that should be
heard in federal court. Mississippi has permitted innocent sellers to be indemnified by product
manufacturers that are determined to be at fault. But, that approach created removal obstacles
for primary target defendants seeking to have their cases heard in federal courts. Plaintiff
lawyers could continue to name innocent sellers as pseudo-parties just to get Mississippi
jurisdiction and venue in a “magic jurisdiction.”
HB 13 insulates innocent sellers who are not actively negligent, but instead are mere
conduits of a product. Under the bill, the seller of a product, other than a manufacturer, shall not
be liable unless the seller exercised substantial control over the harm causing aspect of the
product, the harm was caused by a seller’s alteration or modification of the product, the seller
had actual knowledge of the defective condition at the time the product was sold, or the seller
made an express warranty about the aspect of the product which caused the plaintiff’s harm.
Punitive Damages Caps: Punitive damages are extraordinary damages that have nothing to
do with compensating a person for injuries suffered. Rather, punitive damages are awarded to
punish the wrongdoer for its actions, and to deter the defendant and others from engaging in the
same or similar conduct in the future. The U.S. Supreme Court has expressed concern that
punitive damages are “skyrocketing” and have “run wild.” Mississippi has been the site of
numerous multimillion-dollar punitive damages awards.
As part of the special session in 2002, the legislature imposed “sliding caps” on punitive
damages based on the net worth of the defendant. HB 13 lowers some of those caps. Now in
Mississippi, punitive damages awards cannot exceed:

$20 million for a defendant with a net worth of $1 billion;

$15 million for a defendant with a net worth between $750 million and $1 billion;

$5 million for a defendant with a net worth of more than $500 million but not
more than $750 million (new cap under HB 13 – cut old cap in ½);

$3.75 million for defendants between $100 million and $500 million (new cap
under HB 13 – cut old cap in ½);

$2.5 million for defendants worth $50 million but not more than $100 million
(new cap under HB 13 – cut old cap in ½); or

Two percent of the defendant’s net worth for a defendant with a net worth of $50
million or less (new cap under HB 13 – cut old cap in ½).
Protection for Premises Owners: Under HB 13, civil liability is abolished for premises
owners for death or injury to independent contractors or their employees if the contractor knew
or reasonably should have known of the danger that caused the harm.
Joint Liability Reform: Joint liability, sometimes called “deep pocket” liability, provides
that if a defendant cannot satisfy its portion of a judgment, the remaining at-fault defendants may
be required to pay the uncollectible share. In a special session in 2002, the legislature abolished
joint liability for noneconomic damages. For economic damages, joint liability was abolished
for any defendant found to be less than thirty percent at fault. Joint liability continued to apply
to any defendant found to be thirty percent or more at fault, but only to the extent necessary for
the claimant to recover fifty percent of his or her recoverable damages.
HB 13 abolishes joint and several liability for all defendants. Defendants are not
responsible for any fault allocated to an immune tortfeasor or a tortfeasor whose liability is
limited by law.
2
Jury Patriotism: HB 13 seeks to make jury service more “user friendly” and less of a
financial burden by more clearly defining hardship exemptions and by establishing a fund to
supplement or replace lost wages for jurors in civil cases who serve for more than ten days.
Jurors that fail to appear and obtain a postponement of jury service may be held on civil
contempt of court and fined up to $500 or three days imprisonment, or both. In the alternative,
the court may require the prospective juror to perform community service for a period no less
than if the person would have completed jury service, and provide proof of completion of this
community service to the court.
3