<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[Miscellaneous - Borchardt Law Firm]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/categories/miscellaneous/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/categories/miscellaneous/</link>
        <description><![CDATA[Borchardt Law Firm's Website]]></description>
        <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 21:41:59 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        
        <language>en-us</language>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Court Rules Damage Caps Are Unconstitutional Infringement on Right to Jury Trial]]></title>
                <link>https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/court-rules-damage-caps-are-unconstitutional-infringement-on-rig/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/court-rules-damage-caps-are-unconstitutional-infringement-on-rig/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Borchardt Law Firm Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>In Texas, a medical malpractice case has limits on the amount of non economic damages that can be recovered, usually $250,000.00. So no matter how severe and devastating the damage, the limit on non economic damage may be $250,000.00. Even if a drunken or drug addicted doctor inflicts brain damage on a child, that is&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="is-resized alignright"><img decoding="async" alt="Court Rules Damage Caps Are Unconstitutional Infringement on Right to Jury Trial" src="/static/2026/06/4a_supreme-court.jpg" style="width:300px;height:221px" /></figure></div><p>In Texas, a medical malpractice case has limits on the amount of non economic damages that can be recovered, usually $250,000.00. So no matter how severe and devastating the damage, the limit on non economic damage may be $250,000.00. Even if a drunken or drug addicted doctor inflicts brain damage on a child, that is often the cap. That baby, and his or her family, faced with life long consequences can only recover $250,000.00 in most instances for his or her non economic damage.</p><p>Even if a jury awards more than that, the judge is required by law to reduce the amount of damages recovered. In other words, a victim’s right to a jury trial is essentially taken away.</p><p>The right to a jury trial is a constitutional guarantee. The right to a jury trial is found in both the <a href="http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> United States Constitution </a>(Seventh Amendment [“the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”]) and the <a href="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm#1.15" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Texas Constitution</a> (Article I, Section 15 [“The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.”]).</p><p>Almost every single day, juries are deciding whether to impose the death penalty in criminal cases, and we, as a free and civilized society, trust juries to make those most important decisions. Why then should juries not be allowed to determine the amount of damage that has been done in medical malpractice cases? Putting the question another way, why shouldn’t juries (which decide if people live or die) get to decide how much insurance companies should have to pay when somebody is wrongfully injured?<br />The answer – as found in our state and national Constitution – is that juries absolutely should be allowed to make these decisions.</p><p>In states other than Texas, the Courts are beginning to bravely defend the constitutional right to a jury trial. These Courts are striking down “tort reform” or laws that limit the amount of non economic damages.</p><p>Just weeks ago, the Missouri Supreme Court defended the right to trial by jury, declaring that the Missouri statute that limited recoverable damages was unconstitutional. In Watts v. Lester Cox Medical Center, Naython Watts suffered catastrophic brain damage when doctors failed to timely deliver him as a baby. During the delay in delivery, Naython suffered horrific brain damage because of a lack of oxygen. In Missouri, a law limited the amount of non economic damages to $350,000.00. The Missouri Supreme Court upheld the constitution and declared the cap on damages unconstitutional. The Court wrote: “The individual right to trial by jury cannot ‘remain inviolate’ when an injured party is deprived of the jury’s constitutionally assigned role of determining damages according to the particular facts of the case.”</p><p>Our founding fathers thought the right to a jury trial was so important that it was written into the Constitution. Legislatures which, often at the behest of insurance companies, write laws that limit the role of juries are ignoring constitutional liberties and guarantees. In Texas, we need brave, conservative judges and legislators who will defend the constitution against the interests of big business and the insurance industry.</p><p>At <a href="/">Borchardt Law Firm</a>, we hope that the work we do on behalf of injured victims will protect future generations of Texans. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our firm, 817-332-9300 or toll free at 866-832-9300.</p> ]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Texas Supreme Court Consistently Sides with Big Business]]></title>
                <link>https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/texas-supreme-court-consistently-sides-with-big-business/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.genolawyer.com/articles/texas-supreme-court-consistently-sides-with-big-business/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Borchardt Law Firm Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>The non-profit Texas Watch Organization has released the results of its Court Watch project, which reviewed the decisions of the Texas Supreme Court over the last decade. This study claims to have found major biases and flaws in the actions of the state’s highest court. Researchers noted that this trend seems to have begun when&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="is-resized alignright"><img decoding="async" alt="Texas Supreme Court Consistently Sides with Big Business" src="/static/2026/06/4a_supreme-court.jpg" style="width:300px;height:221px" /></figure></div><p>The non-profit Texas Watch Organization has released the results of its <a href="http://www.texastribune.org/texas-courts/texas-supreme-court/texas-watch-claims-supreme-court-favors-businesses/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Court Watch</a> project, which reviewed the decisions of the Texas Supreme Court over the last decade. This study claims to have found major biases and flaws in the actions of the state’s highest court. Researchers noted that this trend seems to have begun when Governor Rick Perry entered office and began appointing justices to the court. Alex Winslow, <a href="http://www.texaswatch.org/2012/01/report-decade-long-review-shows-texas-supreme-court-is-activist-ideological/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">director of Court Watch</a>, commented on this phenomenon: “The Texas Supreme Court is an activist, results-oriented body that over the last 10 years has developed into a safe haven for corporate defendants at the expense of individuals, families, and small business owners … The statistics speak for themselves. The court’s pro-defendant ideology can not be disputed.”</p><p>Exactly how extensive is the Texas Supreme Court’s preference for the powerful? According to Court Watch’s findings, when corporate and government bodies are sued, they actually win 74% of the time. When consumers sue big business, they lose their case 79% of the time. These statistics show a significantly lopsided set of decisions. One of the most interesting components of these statistics is the fact that these cases had already been decided in lower jury courts; often the citizens win these cases, only to have their verdicts ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant. A notable example involves a woman who was granted up to $20 million in her jury case against a Crohn’s disease medication that left her with debilitating and lasting complications. However, once her case was brought to the Supreme Court, the court overturned the decision and actually used the opportunity to set up protections for drug manufacturers that may shield them from many future defective drug lawsuits (see full <a href="https://www.genolawyerblog.com/2012/06/texas-supreme-court-favors-big.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">discussion </a>here).</p><p>The Texas Constitution includes a provision that limits the Texas Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to matters of law, not the facts of a given case. This rule can be disregarded, as a purely factual basis has been known to be used to overturn a jury’s case. The court may be overstepping its boundaries in a way that negatively affects the citizens of Texas and promotes the interests of business. Court Watch states, “The jury is our smallest, most direct, and least corrupted form of government. … However, the Texas Supreme Court has displayed a fundamental disregard for juries.” In fact, the Texas Supreme Court has overturned the local jury’s decisions 74% of the time since 2004. These findings demonstrate an inequality in the decisions of the Texas Supreme Court, something that is certainly worthy of notice and concern.</p><p>At <a href="/">Borchardt Law Firm</a>, we wish for no family to ever experience incapacitating tragedies and not receive the compensation that they deserve. Biases in the system may leave many citizens deprived of the justice they need. Our firm has the experience and the drive necessary to continue to strive for the improved protection of future generations of Texans. If you or a loved one have ever suffered from a misfortune and feel you were not properly warned about the potential risks, don’t hesitate to contact a lawyer to discuss any legal compensation you might be entitled to. Borchardt Law Firm represent clients over many areas in Texas; feel free to give us a call.</p><p>Toll Free: 866.832.9300<br />Phone: 817.332.9300<br />Fax: 817.332.9301<br />firm@attorneysmb.com<br />801 Cherry St #1005<br />Fort Worth, Texas 76102</p> ]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>