CURRENT DEVELOPMENT 2008-2009: Modeling Optimal Mandates: A Case Study on the Controversy over Mandatory Professional Liability Coverage and Its Disclosure Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 2009 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics
Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT 2008-2009: Modeling Optimal Mandates: A Case Study on the Controversy over Mandatory Professional Liability Coverage and Its Disclosure

Summer, 2009

Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics

22 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 1029

Author

DEVIN S. MILLS * & GALINA PETROVA **

Excerpt

INTRODUCTION

In the controversy over mandatory disclosure of malpractice insurance and mandatory insurance coverage rules, 2008 marked a rather eventful year. First, in May, in culmination of its several attempts over three years, the California State Bar passed a mandatory disclosure rule. 2 Second, in October, the Virginia State Bar's Council voted down a proposed mandatory malpractice insurance coverage rule 3 that had been percolating through a Bar committee for three years. 4 In both cases, the efforts to pass mandatory disclosure and coverage rules were met with heated debates.

These debates have centered on the practicality and necessity of such rules. Proponents of malpractice insurance regulation, both in mandatory insurance and disclosure of coverage, claim that malpractice insurance rules are necessary to protect the public. 5 Their opponents see no real necessity for the rules and portend that such rules would have disastrous effects on the legal profession. 6 This fervent debate is interesting because the issues surrounding legal malpractice insurance regulation are not new. 7 Despite the existence of many established mandatory disclosure regimes, no one has thoroughly assessed the empirical effects of mandatory disclosure and mandatory coverage ("malpractice insurance rules") in judging the validity of these arguments. The legal community must evaluate the practical concerns that impede passage of malpractice insurance rules in light of the actual effects that already have occurred in existing regimes.

This Note will look to California's and Virginia's recent attempts to pass malpractice insurance rules, examining the considerations, challenges, ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities