Drafting the Model State Tort Law at the MPL Association Conference
Earlier this month at the MPL Association Annual Conference in Philadelphia, ProAssurance staff led a session to debate the ideal state tort model law.
As a twist on the MPL Association’s annual Legislative Update session, instead of just learning about tort legislation passed or blocked in the recent sessions, we hosted a competition with three panelists conducting a literal draft.
In the early 2010s, ProAssurance was re-envisioning itself as a national platform, and Stan Starnes, our CEO at the time, would often remind us, “Remember if we’re going to be in 50 states, we’re going to be in 50 different lines of business.” While there are many reasons why the business shifts once you cross a state border—from culture to distribution, to organized medicine and more—chief among them is tort law.
The vision for our MPL Association session started with the question, “If we were to take the best from each state to draft the model MPL tort law, what would that look like?” Then we said, “Instead of doing that once, what if we do that three times and make it a competition?”
If you’ve ever managed a fantasy football team, you will understand this concept. There are a fixed number of resources: in our case the 50 states. The team managers have specific positions to fill, and they have to establish a strategy because the pool of resources declines as the rounds of the draft progress.
The Players
Our three managers on the panel included:
- Laura Ekery, JD, CPCU, ProAssurance’s Regional Claims Executive for the Southwest, drafting for “The Non-Ekerynomic Damage Caps”
- Beverly ‘Bev’ Razon, COPIC’s SVP for Public Affairs, drafting for the “Joint and Beveral Liabilities” team
- Marc D. Craw, Esq., MLMIC Insurance Company’s Senior Director of Government Affairs, leading “The Crawlateral Source Rulers”
The session was moderated by me, with MPL Association’s Senior Vice President, Public Policy and Legal Affairs, Mike Stinson, JM, weighing in with expert commentary after each round.
Rules
The ‘draft’ had seven rounds with each team picking one state per round. Drafting a state meant the manager could claim it for only one specific provision tort reform. Once a state was drafted, it was completely off the board—it could not be drafted by any other team, and the team who selected it could only use it for the one reason they picked it.
For example, if a team selected Texas for its low damage cap, they could not also use Texas for its statute of limitations. The draft order reversed every round, a ‘snake draft’ format, in the interest of treating our panelists fairly.
Each team had six pre-selected issues to fill in any order during the first six rounds:
- Certificates of Merit/Affidavit of Merit
- Collateral Source Rules
- Damage Caps
- Judgment Interest
- Peer Review Confidentiality
- Statutes of Limitations
Our seventh and final round was a wild card, during which our panelists could pick any remaining state for any reason outside the six preselected issues.
As our panelists made their selections, they described their strategy and thought process behind the pick as well as explaining to the audience details of the law and placing it in the context of history including judicial review.
Here are the round-by-round selections:
At the conclusion of the draft, our panelists were able to make a closing statement to convince the audience why their team was the best. The audience of almost 100 people then voted to pick the winner.
ProAssurance’s Laura Ekery was the top audience vote-getter. She drafted a great team and also benefited from the many ProAssurance MPL Association conference attendees who came to support us. Her prize was a statue of Rocky Balboa in honor of the meeting’s host city.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
.png?width=300&name=MicrosoftTeams-image%20(28).png)
Election-Year Uncertainty and Healthcare Buying Behavior
I remember a past election cycle when “healthcare reform” dominated the headlines. Almost every physician I called on asked, “Mace, what are you hearing about the election and reimbursement?” There was constant discussion about cost controls, restructured payments, and Medicare cuts. The market I served had a very high percentage of Medicare patients, so I was concerned as well.
The noise was enough to make me sell all my healthcare stocks. Prices were falling, and it felt prudent at the time. Shortly after the election, however, they bounced back. I missed the rebound.
Whether those fears were justified isn’t the point. What matters is that fear and uncertainty change thinking and behavior. Physicians who were previously receptive to exploring new products suddenly became cautious. Conversations that once centered on clinical improvement shifted toward financial concerns and practice survival.
I didn’t expect this to affect my sales. Surgeons weren’t responsible for paying for the products I sold; hospitals were. Yet as the election approached, I repeatedly heard the same phrase: “Let’s wait until after the election.”
The issue wasn’t policy. It was uncertainty—and uncertainty changes how people make decisions.
Political Noise Alters Psychology Before Policy
We see this pattern repeatedly. Even before a regulation changes, anticipation begins influencing behavior.
I see it in my business today. Healthcare manufacturers and distributors, who are normally eager to book me for keynotes and workshops, defer spending as an election approaches. Markets fluctuate. Expansion plans pause. Investors wait for clarity. The overall tone shifts from growth to caution.
When the future feels unclear, focus shifts from growth to protection. People conserve, both financially and psychologically.
In my article last month in ProVisions, I discussed how decision fatigue impacts physician buying behavior. Few factors reduce decision bandwidth as much as financial uncertainty does. When it rises:
- Buyers narrow decisions to what feels essential.
- Optional changes get postponed.
- Sensitivity to downside risk increases.
Even before anything officially changes, behavior does.
What This Means for MPL Agents
With 2026 approaching as an election year, legislative conversations will intensify. Healthcare will be debated loudly, and clients are likely to have questions.
It’s not your job to talk politics with clients (just don’t!). Nor is it your role to analyze every proposed bill or forecast every outcome. But understanding how uncertainty reshapes decision-making can strengthen your conversations.
Here are a few patterns to anticipate:
- Longer decision cycles. A delayed decision may have nothing to do with dissatisfaction. During uncertain periods, “wait and see” becomes a default strategy.
- Reduced tolerance for urgency. When financial concerns rise, pressure-based tactics can backfire. Clients tend to value clarity and steadiness more than rapid change.
- Increased need for reassurance. Political conversations may spark concern, but the underlying questions are usually about exposure, protection, and managing downside risk.
Selling Stability in Unstable Times
You might say you sell MPL insurance, but what you really sell is stability. HCPs need to trust that you will anticipate their needs, be reliable, and have the knowledge to guide them through any surprises.
In stressful seasons, success isn’t about adding urgency (election years supply plenty of that). It’s about reducing noise, respecting timing, and providing steady reassurance that your clients are protected, regardless of what the headlines are debating.
|
Written by Mace Horoff of Medical Sales Performance. Mace Horoff is a representative of Sales Pilot. He helps sales teams and individual representatives who sell medical devices, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, healthcare services, and other healthcare-related products to sell more and earn more by employing a specialized healthcare system. Have a topic you’d like to see covered? Email your suggestions to AskMarketing@ProAssurance.com. |
Our 50th Year
 Then ➡️ Now Marcy Angulo Southwest Regional Senior Claims Associate, Claims Department Celebrating 32 years in 2026
|
 Then ➡️ Now Jeff Kruger Lead Claims Specialist, Claims Celebrating 33 years in 2026
|
Dari Paulus, Broker Strategies Manager [not pictured]
Dari began her time at the Company with Pennsylvania Medical Society Liability Insurance Company (PMSLIC), which was later acquired by NORCAL. Celebrating 39 years in 2026.
Risk Management Updates
RAPID RISK REVIEW PODCAST
Bridging the Gap: Navigating the Time Between an Event and Legal Support
An unexpected clinical outcome can trigger a cascade of emotions and professional uncertainty. In this high-stakes environment, the minutes and hours immediately following an event are often the most defining for your future liability and peace of mind.
In this episode, we are joined by Adam Draney, Director of Claims at ProAssurance, to discuss the "Pre-Counsel Gap"—the crucial, often chaotic window of time between an adverse event and the formal assignment of legal defense. Adam pulls back the curtain on the claims process, offering practical, expert-vetted guidance on how physicians should conduct themselves to protect their patients, practices, and professional reputations.
Allegation
The patient alleged failure to diagnose malaria, resulting in delayed treatment, prolonged hospitalization and amputation of multiple toes.
Read the issue
Medication errors remain among the most common, preventable patient harm events, due to organizational issues, technological factors, and communication breakdowns. More specifically, medication errors fall into two main categories—acts of omission and acts of commission.
Read the issue
In this episode, we examine an innovative group-based model for well-child visits that reimagines how pediatric care is delivered. Joined by pediatrician Dr. Michelle Gallas, the discussion explores how shared medical appointments bring parents together to navigate common developmental milestones, exchange practical insights, and build a sense of community that extends beyond the clinic walls.
Listen now
The deceased maternal patient’s family alleged that the labor and delivery team failed to appropriately manage a postpartum hemorrhage which caused the patient’s death.
Read the issue
Amid rising reports and legal claims, physician sexual misconduct remains a serious challenge. Upholding ethics is essential, and doctors must navigate increasing scrutiny while maintaining trust and compassionate care for patients.
Read the issue- Communications
- Design
- Digital Marketing
