The American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA) and Munich Reinsurance America, Inc (Munich Re US) released survey findings on consumer perceptions of certain legal tactics used in civil litigation.
The survey, conducted online by The Harris Poll among more than 2,000 US adults, examined views on lawyer advertising, high jury awards, third-party litigation funding (TPLF), and jury anchoring.
According to the survey, 75% of respondents were unfamiliar with the term “jury anchoring,” and 70% had not heard of TPLF. Once informed, 69% said they believed these legal strategies would contribute to higher costs for home, auto, and business insurance. Additionally, 66% agreed that the practices could increase the cost of consumer goods.
Munich Re US noted that public concerns about legal advertising and large jury awards were also reflected in the findings. The survey showed that 67% of respondents supported restrictions on lawyer advertising to prevent misleading claims and limit lawsuit filings.
Another 68% agreed that widely publicized high-value jury verdicts contribute to an expectation of large payouts. The same percentage indicated that jury awards exceeding US$10 million – commonly referred to as “nuclear verdicts” – would likely drive up insurance costs.
Regarding third-party litigation funding, the survey found that 77% of participants viewed foreign investor involvement in US civil litigation as a potential national security risk. Additionally, 78% agreed that foreign investors should be prohibited from funding legal claims in the US.
Swiss Re US reported that jury anchoring – the practice of lawyers proposing large, often unsubstantiated, damages to influence jury decisions – was also a significant concern among respondents.
According to the survey, 75% believed the practice leads to higher jury awards, while 84% agreed that damage award proposals should be supported by factual evidence.
A previous survey conducted by APCIA and Munich Re US in early 2024 found that 86% of respondents supported state and federal action to address abuses in the legal system. Additionally, 88% believed in full transparency and disclosure of all financial interests in civil lawsuits.
Bonnie Guth (pictured above), head of government affairs at Munich Re America Services, said that increasing public awareness of these legal practices is essential for understanding their impact on insurance costs.
“Allowing this abuse of the legal system to remain unchecked, it will likely persist and send improper signals to jurors, judges, and defendants about the value of damages. In turn, this can lead to higher insurance costs, financial strain on insurers and reinsurers, depletion of municipal resources, and disincentives for businesses to take risks,” Guth said.
Stef Zielezienski, executive vice president and chief legal officer of APCIA, said that tactics used by some plaintiff attorneys contribute to a culture of litigation that raises costs for businesses and consumers.
“Reforms are needed to reduce consumer costs and improve insurance availability and affordability,” Zielezienski said. “The majority of Americans agree that these tactics are driving up insurance costs. We need state and federal policymakers to address legal system abuse to restore fairness and predictability of justice in the United States.”
Source: Insurance Business Magazine