Product liability and legal reform : hearing before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 10, to reform the federal civil justice system; to reform product liability law, February 13, 1995 online

PRODUCT UABIUTY AND LEGAL REFORM

Y 4. J 89/1: 104/4 ^^^^^^^^

Product Liability and Legal Ref orn, . . .

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIAKY
HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H.R. 10

TO REFORM THE FEDERAL CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM; TO REFORM
PRODUCT LIABILITY LAW



FEBRUARY 13, 1995



Serial No. 4




JUL 2 6 1995



Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
89-146 CC WASHINGTON : 1995

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-047169-9



>\



PRODUCT UABIUTY AND LEGAL REFORM

Y 4. J 89/ 1 ; 104/4 ^^^^^

Product Liability and Legal Ref orn, . . .

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIAEY
HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES



ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS


FIRST SESSION


ON


H.R. 10


TO REFORM THE FEDERAL CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM; TO REFORM
PRODUCT LIABILITY LAW


FEBRUARY 13, 1995


Serial No. 4


l'"*^'"late^«"


^ JUL 2 6 1995




Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary


U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
89-146 CC WASHINGTON : 1995



For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-047169-9



COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY



HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman



CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,

WisconBin
BILL McCOLLUM, Florida
GEORGE W. GEKAS, Pennsylvania
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
CHARLES T. CANADY, Florida
BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia
STEPHEN E. BUYER, Indiana
MARTIN R. HOKE, Ohio
SONNY BONO, California
FRED HEINEMAN, North Carolina
ED BRYANT, Tennessee
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
MICHAEL PATRICK FLANAGAN, Ilhnais
BOB BARR, Georgia



JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
JOHN BRYANT, Texas
JACK REED, Rhode Island
JERROLD NADLER, New York
ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina
XAVIER BECERRA, California
JOSE E. SERRANO, New York
ZOE LOFGREN, California
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas



Alan F. Coffey, Jr., General Counsel/ Staff Director
JUUAN Epstein, Minority Staff Director



., ,i*^;ivw_F



am



m



(II)



CONTENTS



HEARING DATE



Page
February 13, 1995 1

TEXT OF BILL
H.R. 10 3

OPENING STATEMENT

Hyde, Hon. Henry J., a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois,

and chairman, Committee on the Judiciary 1

WITNESSES

Chevalier, Peter A., Ph.D., vice president. Corporate Quality and Regulatory

Affairs, Medtronic, Inc 72

Creamer, Robert B., representing Citizen Action 68

Eaton, Thomas A., J.D., J. Alton Hosch Professor of Law, University of

Georgia School of Law 76

Gilbert, Charles E., Jr., president, Cincinnati Gilbert Machine Tool Co., on

behalf of the Association for Manufacturing Technology 48

Head, Patrick J., Esq., vice president and general counsel, FMC Corp 99

Stewart, Larry S., president, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America 53

Waren, William T., Federal affairs counsel. National Conference of State

Legislatures 102

Willard, Richard K., Esq., Steptoe & Johnson 61

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

Chevalier, Peter A., Ph.D., vice president, Corporate Quality and Regulatory
Affairs, Medtronic, Inc.:

Letter dated February 23, 1995, to Congressman Hoke 122

Prepared statement 74

Creamer, Robert B., representing Citizen Action: Prepared statement 69

Eaton, Thomas A., J.D., J. Alton Hosch Professor of Law, University of
Georgia School of Law, and Susette M. Talarico, Ph.D., professor of political
science, University of Georgia: Prepared statement 78

Flanagan, Hon. Michael P., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois: Opening statement 46

Gilbert, Charles E., Jr., president, Cincinnati Gilbert Machine Tool Co., on
behalf of the Association for Manufacturing Technology: Prepared state-
ment 49

Head, Patrick J., Esq., vice president and general counsel, FMC Corp.: Pre-
pared statement 100

Heineman, Hon. Fred, a Representative in Congress from the State of North

Carolina: Opening statement 4

Hyde, Hon. Henry J., a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois,

and chairman. Committee on the Judiciary: Opening statement 42

Stewart, Larry S., president, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America:

Prepared statement 54

Waren, WUliam T., Federal affairs counsel, National Conference of State

Legislatures: Prepared statement 104

Willard, Richard K., Esq., Steptoe & Johnson: Prepared statement 62



(III)



IV

Page

APPENDIXES

Appendix 1. — Article, Copyrighted 1995, Washington Legal Foundation, by
victor E. Schwartz, Mark A. Behrens, and Lori Bean, entitled "Multiple
Imposition of Punitive Damages: The Case for Reform" 139

Appendix 2. — Letter dated February 27, 1995, to Chairman Henry J. Hyde,
from John J. Mullenholz, legislative director. North American Equipment
Dealers Association 145

Appendix 3.^^tatement of the American Medical Association, Re: Issues
Relating to Product Liability Reform Section 103, the Common Sense Legal
Reform Act (H.R. 10) 146

Appendix 4. — Statement of Mick Blackistone, vice president, government rela-
tions. National Marine Manufacturers Association 148

Appendix 5. — Letter dated February 13, 1995, with statement, to Hon. Bob
Goodlatte, from George L. FViest, John M. Olin Professor of Law and
Economics, Yale Law School 149

Appendix 6.— Statement of the Conference of Chief Justices, Office of Govern-
ment Relations, National Center for State Courts 157

Appendix 7. — Statement of Ralph Nader 167

Appendix 8. — Statement of M. Kristen Rand, director, federal policy, Violence

PoUcy Center 172

Appendix 9. — Statement of Mary Griffin, Consumers Union, and Mary EUen

Fise, Consumer Federation of America 176

Appendix 10. — Statement of David C. Weiner, chair, ABA Section of Litiga-
tion, on behalf of the American Bar Association 182

Appendix 11.— Statement of Stuart Z. Grossman, chair, civil justice commit-
tee, American Board of Trail Advocates 206



PRODUCT LIABILITY AND LEGAL REFORM



MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1995

House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (chair-
man of the committee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Henry J. Hyde, Carlos J. Moorhead, F.
James Sensenbrenner, Jr., George W. Grekas, Steven Schiff,
Charles T. Canady, Stephen E. Buyer, Martin R. Hoke, Fred
Heineman, Ed Bryant, Steve Chabot, Michael Patrick Flanagan,
Bob Barr, John Conyers, Jr., Patricia Schroeder, Barney Frank,
John Bryant, Robert C. Scott, Melvin L, Watt, and Sheila Jackson
Lee.

Staff present: Alan F. Coffey, Jr., general counsel/staff director;
Kenny Prater, clerk; and Perry Apelbaum, minority counsel.

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN HYDE

Mr. Hyde. The committee will come to order.

Our hearing this morning is the first time the House Judiciary
Committee has ever held a hearing on the issue of product liability
litigation or omnibus tort reform. Prior to this year, the Judiciary
Committee was a "Bermuda Triangle" for these important issues.

I should note that, last year, when the committee was confronted
with the successful discharge petition drive, it did agree to process
a narrow bill providing a statute of repose for the general aviation
industry. But other than that, nothing. And I can only point out
that these are quite different times.

Legal reform, of course, is an important part of the Contract
With America; and section 103 of the Common Sense Legal Re-
forms Act, which is H.R. 10, focuses on product liability. Specifi-
cally, the provisions deal with the liability of product sellers, puni-
tive damage awards and joint and several liability.

Product liability actions are now governed by State law. Even if
these suits end up in a Federal court, the Federal judge applies
State law. Many believe this patchwork of over 50 separate State
product liability laws is simply costing America too much. It dis-
courages capital investment, dampens job creation and denies con-
sumers new, safer and less expensive products.

Frequently, a product is manufactured in one State, sold in an-
other State, while the alleged injury occurs in yet a third State. On
average, over 70 percent of the goods manufactured in one State
are shipped out of that State and sold elsewhere. So the fundamen-

(1)



tal interstate character of this area of the law would seem to justify
a uniform, national solution.

I strongly believe that individuals who are harmed by defective
products should have appropriate legal remedies and recourse. But
even real victims don't always get the relief they deserve under the
current system. Legal fees and transactional costs make up an esti-
mated 50 to 70 percent of every dollar spent on liability litigation.
Verdicts and monetary awards can differ drastically depending
upon the jurisdiction in which the accident occurred.

This legislation deals with legal standards and procedures gov-
erning product liability litigation. That is, this bill and similar bills
deal with court jurisdiction, the burden of proof, the admissibility
of evidence, legal defenses, the assessment of damages, and so
forth. In short, this issue is about legal rights and remedies. For
that reason, I believe it is important that this committee, the
House Judiciary Committee, consider this important matter.

[The bill, H.R. 10, follows:]



104th congress
1st Session



H.R.10

To reform the Federal civil justice system; to reform product liability law.



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 4, 1995

Mr. Hyde, Mr. Ramstad, Mrs. Chenoweth, and Mr. Condit (for them-
selves, Mr. Armey, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bachus, Mr. Baker of California,
Mr. Baker of Louisiana, Mr. Ballenger, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland,
Mr. Barton of Texas, Mr. Bilirakis, Mr. Bliley, Mr. Blute, Mr.
Bono, Mr. Bunning op Kentucky, Mr. Burr, Mr. Burton of Indi-
ana, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Camp, Mr. Canady, Mr.
Christensen, Mr. Chrysler, Mr. Clinger, Mr. Coburn, Mr.
Cooley, Mr. Cox, Mr. Crane, Mrs. Cubin, Mr. Cunningham, Mr.
Davis, Mr. Doolittle, Mr. Dornan, Ms. Dunn, Mr. Emerson, Mr.
Ensign, Mr. Everett, Mr. Ewing, Mr. Foley, Mr. Forbes, Mrs.
Fowler, Mr. Fox, Mr. Frisa, Mr. Ganske, Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. Gil-
man, Mr. GooDLATTE, Mr. GooDUNG, Mr. Gunderson, Mr. Hancock,
Mr. Hastert, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Mr. Hayworth, Mr.
Heineman, Mr. Herger, Mr. Hilleary, Mr. HOBSON, Mr.
Hostettler, Mr. Houghton, Mr. Inglis of South Carolina, Mrs.
Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. Jones, Mr. Kim, Mr. Knollenberg, Mr.
LaHood, Mr. Largent, Mr. LaTourette, Mr. Lewis of Kentucky, Mr.
Lightpoot, Mr. Linder, Mr. McCollum, Mr. McHuGH, Mr.
MclNTOSH, Mr. Mica, Mr. Miller of Florida, Ms. Molunari, Mrs.
M-iTUCK, Mr. Nussle, Mr. Packard, Mr. Porter, Mr. Portman, Mr.
Radanovich, Mr. RiGGS, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. ROTH, Mr. ROYCE,
Mr. Sanford, Mr. ScHAEFER, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Shadegg,
Mr. Shaw, Mr. Shays of Connecticut, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Smith
of New Jersey, Mr. Smith of Michigan, Mr. Solomon, Mr. Stearns,
Mr. Stockman, Mr. Stump, Mr. Talent, Mr. Tate, Mr. Taylor of
North Carolina, Mr. Tejeda, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. Tiahrt, Mr.
Upton, Mrs. Waldholtz, Mr. Wamp, Mr. Wsldon of Florida, Mr.
Zimmer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Kolbe, Mr. Paxon, Mr. YoUNG of Florida,
Mr. Combest, Mr. Ehrlich, and Mrs. Meyers of Kansas) introduced
the following bill; which was referred as follows:

Title I, referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned



Title II, referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall with-
in the jurisdiction of the conunittee concerned



A BILL

To reform the Federal civil justice system; to reform product
liability law.

1 Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representa-

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the "Common Sense Legal

5 Reforms Act of 1995".

6 TITLE I— CIVIL JUSTICE

7 REFORM

8 SEC. 101. AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEE TO PREVAILING

9 PARTY IN FEDERAL CIVIL DIVERSITY LITIGA-

10 TION.

11 (a) Award of Attorney's Pee. — Section 1332 of

12 title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the

13 end the following:

14 "(e)(1) The district court that exercises jursdiction

15 in a civil action commenced under this section shall award

16 to the party that prevails with respect to a claim in such

17 action an attorney's fee determined in accordance with

18 paragraph (2).

•HR 10 m



3

1 "(2) An attorney's fee awarded under paragraph (1)

2 shall be a reasonable attorney's fee attributable to such

3 claim, except that the fee awarded under such paragraph

4 may not exceed —

5 "(A) the actual cost incurred by the

6 nonprevaiUng party for an attorney's fee payable to

7 an attorney for services in connection with such

8 claim; or

9 "(B) if no such cost was incurred by the

10 nonprevaihng party due to a contingency fee agree-

11 ment, a reasonable cost that would have been in-

12 curred by the nonprevaiUng party for an attorney's

13 noncontingent fee payable to an attorney for services

14 in connection with such claim.

15 "(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), the

16 court in its discretion may refuse to award, or may reduce

17 the amount awarded as, an attorney's fee under paragraph

18 (1) to the extent that the court finds special circumstances

19 that make an award of an attorney's fee determined in

20 accordance with such subparagraph unjust.".

2 1 SEC. 102. HONESTY IN EVIDENCE.

22 (a) Opinion Testimony by Experts. — Rule 702 of

23 the Federal Rules of Evidence is amended —

24 (1) by inserting "(a) In general." before

25 "If, and



•HR 10 IH



4

1 (2) by adding at the end the following:

2 "(b) Adequate basis for opinion. Testimony in

3 the form of an opinion by a witness that is based on sci-

4 entific knowledge shall be inadmissible in evidence unless

5 the court determines that such opinion is —

6 "(1) based on scientifically vaUd reasoning; and

7 "(2) sufficiently reliable so that the probative

8 value of such evidence outweighs the dangers speci-

9 fied in rule 403.

10 "(c) Disqualification. Testimony by a witness

11 who is quahfied as described in subsection (a) is inadmis-

12 sible in evidence if such witness is entitled to receive any

13 compensation contingent on the legal disposition of any

14 claim with respect to which such testimony is offered.".

1 5 SEC. 103. PRODUCT LIABILITY REFORM.

16 (a) Applicability and Preemption. — This section

17 governs any product liabUity action brought in any State

18 or Federal Court against any manufacturer or seller of

19 a product on any theory for harm caused by the product.

20 This section supersedes State law only to the extent that

21 State law applies to an issue covered by this section. Any

22 issue that is not covered by this section shall be governed

23 by otherwise appUcable State or Federal law.

24 (b) Liability Rules Applicable to Product

25 Sellers. —

'^ •HR 10 IH .



5

1 (1) General rule. — Except as provided in

2 paragraph 2, in a product liability action, a product

3 seller shall be liable to a claimant for harm only if

4 the claimant estabUshes that —

5 (A)(i) the product which allegedly caused

6 the harm complained of was sold by the product

7 seller,

8 (ii) the product seller failed to exercise rea-

9 sonable care with respect to the product, and

10 (iii) such failure to exercise reasonable care

1 1 was a proximate cause of the claimant's harm,

12 (B)(i) the product seller made an express

13 warranty applicable to the product which alleg-

14 edly caused the harm complained of, independ-

15 ent of any express warranty made by the manu-

16 facturer as to the same product,

17 (ii) the product failed to conform to the

18 warranty, and

19 (iii) the failure of the product to conform

20 to the warranty caused the claimant's harm, or

21 (C) the product seller engaged in inten-

22 tional wrongdoing as determined under appUca-

23 ble State law and such intentional wrongdoing

24 was a proximate cause of the harm complained

25 of by the claimant.

' sHR 10 IH •



8



6

1 For purposes of subparagraph (A)(ii), a product sell-

2 er shall not be considered to have failed to exercise

3 reasonable care with respect to a product based

4 upon an alleged failure to inspect a product where

5 there was no reasonable opportunity to inspect the

6 product .in a manner which would, in the exercise of

7 reasonable care, have revealed the aspect of the

8 product which allegedly caused the claimant's harm.

9 (2) Special rule. — In a product Uabihty ac-

10 tion, a product seller shall be hable for harm to the

11 claimant caused by such product as if the product

12 seller were the manufacturer of such product if —

13 (A) the manufacturer is not subject to

14 service of process under the laws of the State

15 in which the claimant brings the action, or

16 (B) the court determines that the claimant

17 would be unable to enforce a judgment against

18 the manufacturer.

19 (c) Limitations on Punitive Damages. —

20 (1) General limitation. — Punitive damages

21 maj, to the extent permitted by applicable State law,

22 be awarded against a manufacturer or product seller

23 in a product liability action if the claimant estab-

24 lishes by clear and convincing evidence that the



•HR 10 EO'



7

1 harm suffered was the result of conduct manifesting

2 actual malice.

3 (2) Limitation on amount. — The amount of

4 punitive damages that may be awarded for a claim

5 in any civil action subject to this section shall not

6 exceed 3 times the amount awarded to the claimant

7 for the economic injury on which such claim is

8 based, or $250,000, whichever is greater.

9 (d) Several Liability for Noneconomic Dam-

10 ages. — In any product liabihty action, the liability of each

1 1 manufacturer or seller of the product involved in such ac-

12 tion shall be several only and shall not be joint for non-
13 economic damages. Such manufacturer or seller shall be

14 Uable only for the amount of noneconomic damages allo-

15 cated to such manufacturer or seller in direct proportion

16 to such manufacturer's or such seller's percentage of re-

17 sponsibihty as determined by the trier of fact.

1 8 (e) Definitions. — For purposes of this section —

19 (1) the term "claimant" means any person who

20 brings a product hability action and any person on

21 whose behalf s^ch an action is brought, including

22 such person's decedent if such an action is brought

23 through or on behalf of an estate or such person's

24 legal representative if it is brought through or on be-

25 half of a minor or incompetent,

•HR 10 IH. •



10



8

1 (2) the term "malice" means conduct that is

2 either —

3 (A) specifically intended to cause serious

4 personal injury, or

5 (B) carried out with both a flagrant indif-

6 ference to the rights of the claimant and an

7 awareness that such conduct is Ukely to result

8 in serious personal injury,

9 (3) with respect to a product, the term "manu-

10 facturer" means —

11 (A) any person who is engaged in a busi-

12 ness to produce, create, make, or construct the

13 product and who designs or formulates the

14 product or has engaged another person to de-

15 sign or formulate the product,

16 (B) a product seller of the product who,

17 before placing the product in the stream of

18 commerce —

19 (i) designs or formulates or has en-

20 gaged another person to design or formu-

21 late an aspect of the product af^er the

22 product was initially made by another, and

23 (ii) produces, creates, makes, or con-

24 structs such aspect of the product, or



•HR 10 IH



11



9

1 ' (C) any product seller not described in

2 subparagraph (B) which holds itself out as a

3 manufacturer to the user of the product,

4 (4) the term "product"—

5 (A) means any object, substance, mixture,

6 or raw material in a gaseous, liquid, or solid

7 state —

8 (i) which is capable of delivery itself,

9 in a mixed or combined state, or as a com-

10 ponent part or ingredient,

1 1 (ii) which is produced for introduction

12 into trade or commerce,

13 (iii) which has intrinsic economic

14 value, and

15 (iv) which is intended for sale or lease

16 to persons for commercial or personal use,

17 and

18 (B) does not include —

19 (i) human tissue, human organs,

20 human blood, and human blood products,

21 or

22 (ii) electricity, water delivered by a

23 utihty, natural gas, or steam,

24 (5) the term "product seller" —

25 (A) means a person —

HR 10 IH 2



12



10

1 (i) who sells, distributes, leases, pre-

2 pares, blends, packages, or labels a product

3 or is otherwise involved in placing a prod-

4 uct in the stream of commerce, or

5 (ii) who installs, repairs, or maintains

6 the harm-causing aspect of a product, and

7 (B) does not include —

8 (i) a manufacturer,

9 (ii) a seller or lessor of real property,

10 (iii) a provider of professional services

11 in any case in which the sale or use of a

12 product is incidental to the transaction and

13 the essence of the transaction is the fur-

14 nishing of judgment, skill, or services,

15 (iv) any person who acts only in a fi-

16 nancial capacity with respect to the sale of

17 a product, or

18 (v) any person who leases a product

19 under a lease arrangement in which the se-

20 lection, possession, maintenance, and oper-

21 ation of the product are controlled by a

22 person other than the lessor,

23 (6) the term 'punitive damages' means damages

24 in addition to compensation for actual injury suf-

25 fered, for purposes of imposing punishment for con-

•HR 10 IH



13



11

1 duct engag:ed in with malice and to deter similar fu-

2 ture conduct, but such term does not include com-

3 pensation for actual injury, and

4 (7) the term "State" means any State of the

5 United States, the District of Columbia, the Com-

6 monwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands,

7 Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Is-

8 lands, the Trust Territory' of the Pacific Islands, and

9 any other territon.' or possession of the United
10 States, or any political subdi\ision thereof.

1 1 SEC. 104. ATTORNEY ACCOUNTABILITY.

12 (a) TiUTii IN Attorneys' Fees. — It is the sense

13 of the Congress that each State should require, under pen-

1 4 alty of law, each attorney admitted to practice law in such

1 5 State to disclose in wTiting, to any client uith whom such

16 attorney has entered into a contingency fee agi-eement —

17 (1) the actual services performed for such client

18 in connection with such agreement, and

19 (2) the precise number of hours actually ex-

20 pended by such attorney in the performance of such

21 senices.

22 (b) ^LMENDMENT TO THE pEDElLVi. xilLES OF CHTL

23 PK(j('El)rHE. — Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil

24 Procedure (28 U.S.C. App.) is amended —



14



12

1 (1) in the matter preceding siibdi\ision (1) I)v

2 striking "may" and inserting ''shall";

3 (2) in the penultimate sentence of subdi\ision

4 (1)(A) by striking "may" and inserting "shall": and

5 (3) in subdi\ision (2) —

6 (A) by amending the first sentence to read

7 as follows: "A sanction imposed for a \iolation

8 of this i-ule shall be sufficient to deter repetition

9 of such conduct or comparable conduct by oth-

10 ers similarly situated, and to compensate the

11 parties that were injured by such conduct.":

1 2 and

13 (B) in the second sentence by striking ".

14 if imposed on motion and warranted for effec-

15 tive deterrence,".

1 6 SEC. 105. NOTICE REQUIRED BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF

1 7 CIVIL ACTION.