Across Pennsylvania, families are feeling the squeeze. Health care costs keep climbing. Childcare and groceries cost more. Auto insurance premiums are hitting record highs. Yet, not all of this pressure comes from inflation or the economy. A hidden driver is emerging from our courtrooms — specifically, from Philadelphia — where a wave of lawsuit abuse is quietly driving up costs for everyone else in the Commonwealth.
Nearly three years ago, Pennsylvania changed its venue rule for medical malpractice cases. The reform opened the door for lawsuits to be filed in any county, regardless of where the alleged malpractice occurred. The Pennsylvania Medical Society warned that this would unleash forum shopping — redirecting cases to Philadelphia, where verdicts are typically higher and juries more sympathetic to plaintiffs.
Those warnings proved right. According to a Philadelphia Inquirer investigation, the number of malpractice cases filed in Philadelphia has doubled, and nearly half — 44 percent — now involve care provided outside the city. Cases that once would have been heard in the community where the care occurred are now funneled into one of the nation’s most plaintiff-friendly venues.
This shift has real financial consequences. Insurers and economists agree that when high-dollar verdicts cluster in one jurisdiction, malpractice premiums rise across the board. An independent analysis found that since the rule change, insurance rates for certain medical specialties have climbed by 10.5 to 16.1 percent. Those costs cascade through the entire health system — raising hospital expenses, health insurance premiums, and even influencing where doctors choose to practice.
When liability risks spike, doctors increasingly avoid high-exposure specialties such as obstetrics, neurosurgery, or emergency medicine. Communities outside Philadelphia may soon find it harder to keep qualified physicians or maintain 24-hour trauma services. In short, the ripple effects of Philadelphia’s courtroom jackpot don’t stop at City Hall — they reach every corner of Pennsylvania.
This isn’t an argument against legitimate claims. Patients who suffer from true malpractice deserve justice. But justice should be tied to place — to the community where the care occurred, where the witnesses live, and where residents share the outcome. When lawyers steer cases into Philadelphia solely for the prospect of bigger verdicts, the system no longer serves fairness — it serves profit.
Pennsylvania’s courts should not be an engine for economic redistribution by verdict. It’s time to restore balance to our justice system by revisiting the venue rule and returning cases to the communities from which they arise. Until then, every inflated verdict in Philadelphia will keep echoing across the state — in higher premiums, higher bills, and fewer doctors willing to shoulder the risk.