Anchoring

Prohibiting plaintiffs and their attorneys from suggesting arbitrary and specific damage amounts will help prevent excessive jury awards influenced by inflated requests.

The Problem

Plaintiffs’ attorneys often use “anchoring” tactics by suggesting exorbitant damage amounts during trials, leading juries to award disproportionately high verdicts, sometimes referred to as “nuclear verdicts®,” disconnected from actual harm suffered.

ATRA’s Position

Implement rules prohibiting plaintiffs from suggesting specific damage amounts during trials to ensure fairer outcomes.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Anchoring

No related legislation or reform items found for this issue.



Anchoring News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Anchoring

Gov. Kemp Signs Major Tort Reform Bills in ‘Judicial Hellhole’ Georgia

Today, the American Tort Reform Association celebrates Gov. Brian Kemp sig...

Georgia Senate Acts to Restore Fairness in Civil Justice System

Last week, the Georgia Senate passed critical tort reform legislation on a...

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Anchoring
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Monsanto v. Durnell
(U.S., filed March 2, 2026): Arguing that requirements for herbicide labeling should not be made case-by-case in litigation sparked by a flawed IARC ...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Cowan v. Dr. Slann et.al.
(N.D., filed February 23, 2026): Arguing that reasonable limits on medical liability improve the health care system for doctors and patients and Nort...
North Dakota
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Oregon Local Legal Services Advertising 2021-2025
Trial lawyers and aggregators increasingly spend large sums of money on television, digital,and print advertising to recruit new clients. In 2025, it...
Oregon
The Junk Science Playbook
The Machine That Sparks and Supports Mass Tort LitigationIntroduction and Executive SummaryMass tort litigation is a sprawling, profit-driven...
Bio-Lab, Inc. v. Fannie Tartt et al.
(GA, filed January 20, 2026): Arguing that traditional tort law and persuasive decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous state high courts do ...
Georgia
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Sanctionable: The unsupported, exaggerated, and suspicious claims plaguing our nation’s courts
There is growing concern that many lawsuits filed in our nation’s courts are unsupported, involve manufactured or exaggerated injuries, or stem from ...
California, Florida, Louisiana, New York, Pennsylvania
Lyon v. Riverside Methodist Hospital et. al.
(OH., filed October 7, 2025): Arguing that the Court should review the lower court’s decision because the Court should comprehensively address the co...
Ohio
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Atlas Turner, Inc. v. Welch
(U.S., filed September 22, 2025): Arguing the Court should review the use of receiverships by the South Carolina asbestos court.  The receivership pr...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Letter to House Judiciary Committee re: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Stone Slab Products Act
This letter was submitted on behalf of the American Tort Reform Association to express our support for H.R. 5437, the “Protection of Lawful Commerce ...
California
Letter to DOJ re: RFI on State Laws Having Significant Adverse Effects on the National Economy or Interstate Commerce
Re: Request for Information on State Laws Having Significant Adverse Effects on the National Economy or Significant Adverse Effects on Interstate Com...



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.