Insurance liability; disclosure of limits prior to filing a lawsuit. (HB172)

Introduced By

Del. Terry Kilgore (R-Gate City)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Civil procedure; disclosure of insurance liability limits. Requires disclosure of the liability limits to an attorney for an injured person, prior to the filing of a civil action for personal injuries resulting from a motor vehicle accident, after the attorney provides written notice of representation. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Passed


12/26/2007Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/09/08 084666588
12/26/2007Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/10/2008Assigned Courts sub: Civil
02/08/2008Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (19-Y 3-N) (see vote tally)
02/09/2008Committee substitute printed 081494588-H1
02/09/2008Read first time
02/11/2008Read second time
02/11/2008Committee substitute agreed to 081494588-H1
02/11/2008Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB172H1
02/12/2008Read third time and passed House (55-Y 43-N)
02/12/2008VOTE: --- PASSAGE (55-Y 43-N) (see vote tally)
02/12/2008Communicated to Senate
02/13/2008Constitutional reading dispensed
02/13/2008Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/14/2008Assigned Courts sub: Civil
02/28/2008Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (15-Y 0-N)
02/29/2008Committee substitute printed 089590588-S1
03/03/2008Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N)
03/04/2008Read third time
03/04/2008Reading of substitute waived
03/04/2008Committee substitute agreed to 089590588-S1
03/04/2008Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute HB172S1
03/04/2008Passed Senate with substitute (40-Y 0-N)
03/05/2008Placed on Calendar
03/05/2008Senate substitute agreed to by House 089590588-S1 (65-Y 33-N)
03/05/2008VOTE: --- ADOPTION (65-Y 33-N)
03/07/2008Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB172ER)
03/07/2008Signed by Speaker
03/09/2008Signed by President
04/11/2008G Approved by Governor-Chapter 819 (effective 7/1/08)


Jackson Landers writes:

This bill is not a very good idea. It would tend to encourage the worst sort of predatory litigation rather than a rational consideration of what is actually justice.

The maximum amount of money available to a defendant to cover a judgment is irrelevant to the pursuit of justice. The damages are what they are. If a man runs his car into another man's truck, the cost to repair the truck remains the same whether the driver of the car has $10M at his disposal or $500,000.

The only reason for this bill would be to allow the rare yet dangerous predatory sort of plaintiff to decide how much he can shake someone down for. It's got nothing to do with anything that has a place in the justice system.