Lawsuit Inflation Analysis: Nuclear Verdicts, Costs, and Reforms

Social inflation is the term the insurance industry uses for the rise in liability claims costs that outpaces ordinary economic inflation. It captures the extra growth in payouts driven by larger jury verdicts, more aggressive litigation, outside investors funding lawsuits, and shifting public attitudes toward corporations. Those forces have added billions of dollars to claims costs over the past decade and show up in the premiums businesses pay and the prices consumers see.

Warren Buffett coined the phrase in 1978 to describe “a broadening definition by society and juries of what is covered by insurance policies.”¹ Actuaries sometimes call the same phenomenon “superimposed inflation.”² The Swiss Re Institute measures it as claims severity growth minus economic inflation. By that index, U.S. social inflation averaged 5.4 percent annually from 2017 to 2022, compared with 3.7 percent for economic inflation, and peaked at roughly 7 percent in 2023.³

The phenomenon is not exclusively American, but it is sharpest in the United States because of structural features of the legal system: jury trials, punitive damages, contingency fees, and the political selection of some judges.²

Nuclear Verdicts and How Fast They Have Grown

The most visible symptom is what insurers call “nuclear verdicts,” jury awards of $10 million or more. In 2024, 135 nuclear verdicts were recorded in the United States, a 52 percent increase over 2023. The median award was $51 million, and total plaintiff payouts reached $32.3 billion.⁴

A broader study of 1,288 nuclear verdicts between 2013 and 2022 found a ten-year median of $21 million and a mean of $89 million. “Mega” verdicts above $100 million quadrupled over the decade, with at least 23 such awards in 2023 alone.⁵ Recent examples include a $7.3 billion verdict against a cable company in Dallas, a $2.065 billion Roundup verdict in Georgia, and a $1.7 billion Ford rollover verdict in Gwinnett County, Georgia.⁶

Product liability, auto accidents, and medical liability account for roughly two-thirds of nuclear verdicts.⁷ Nearly 75 percent are concentrated in ten states, with California, Florida, New York, and Texas making up half the national total.⁶ Noneconomic and punitive damages dominate. In cases with detailed breakdowns, economic damages were only about 10 percent of the total; noneconomic damages were 37 percent and punitive damages 52 percent.⁵

Punitive damages have climbed on their own curve. The median punitive award grew from $35 million in 2017 to more than $87 million in 2022, while the mean topped $690 million that year.⁸

What Is Driving the Trend

Third-Party Litigation Funding

Outside investors increasingly finance lawsuits in exchange for a cut of any settlement or verdict. The industry’s assets under management reached roughly $16.1 billion by 2025,⁹ and the United States accounts for about 52 percent of global litigation funding activity.⁷

Critics argue that outside funding reduces plaintiffs’ incentive to settle early, because the investor has the patience and the motivation to push for a bigger payout. Most jurisdictions do not require disclosure of funding arrangements, so courts and defendants often have no way to know an investor has a stake in the case.¹⁰ An Ernst & Young model from 2024 estimated that the direct and indirect costs of litigation funding could total $50 billion for U.S. insurers over 2024–2028 at the high end, adding 4.5 to 5.5 percentage points to commercial liability loss ratios in the most likely scenario.¹¹

Reptile Theory and Anchoring

A litigation strategy called “reptile theory,” drawn from a 2009 trial manual by jury consultant David Ball and plaintiff attorney Don Keenan, encourages lawyers to frame a defendant’s conduct as a threat not just to the plaintiff but to the jurors, their families, and the community. The goal is to trigger what the authors describe as the brain’s survival instinct, shifting jurors from weighing specific facts toward wanting to punish the defendant for their own protection.¹²

A companion tactic called “anchoring” involves naming an enormous dollar figure for damages early in trial so the jury’s mental baseline for a reasonable award shifts upward.¹³ No empirical research has conclusively proven reptile theory raises win rates, but the approach is prominent enough that defense attorneys now routinely file motions to exclude it and train witnesses to avoid its traps.¹²

Public Attitudes and Perceptions of Money

Jury sentiment reflects wider attitudes. A 2022 Pew Research survey found that 71 percent of U.S. adults believe corporations have a negative effect on the country’s direction.¹⁴ The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer found 61 percent of people globally reported moderate or high grievance against business, government, and the wealthy. Among those with high grievance, business was rated 81 points less ethical than among those with low grievance, a gap that matters when the same people serve on juries.¹⁵

Perceptions of money have drifted as well. A YouGov survey found Americans believe 10 percent of households earn $1 million or more annually. The actual share is less than 0.5 percent.¹⁴ That desensitization to large numbers makes jurors more willing to award sums that once would have seemed extraordinary.

Plaintiff Attorney Advertising

Trial lawyers and lead-generation firms spent over $2.5 billion on advertising in 2024, a 32 percent jump from 2020.¹⁶ Attorney involvement in auto bodily injury claims rose from 47 percent in 2002 to 52 percent in 2017, and in personal injury protection claims from 28 percent to 39 percent over the same period.¹⁷

What It Costs Consumers and Businesses

U.S. commercial casualty insurance losses grew at an average annual rate of 11 percent over the five years ending in 2023, reaching $143 billion, while liability lines exposed to bodily injury claims recorded cumulative underwriting losses of $43 billion over the same period.¹⁸

The hardest-hit lines include commercial auto (particularly trucking), professional liability, product liability, and directors and officers insurance.⁷ Products liability incurred losses grew at an annualized 17.4 percent from 2014 to 2018, more than five times general inflation. Commercial auto annualized loss rates jumped from 1 percent in 2007–2013 to 10.9 percent in 2013–2018.¹⁷ A 2022 study estimated social inflation alone accounted for $20 billion in commercial auto liability claims between 2010 and 2019.

Those costs flow downstream. A 2024 Brattle Group study for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimated total U.S. tort costs at $529 billion in 2022, or roughly $4,207 per household. The figure varied by state, from below $2,600 per household in Maine and Wisconsin to over $5,500 in New York, Florida, and New Jersey.¹⁹ A 2025 consumer guide from Triple-I and Munich Reinsurance America put the added cost at $6,664 per family of four when higher prices for goods and services are included.²⁰

These figures come from industry-backed research that defines “tort costs” broadly, including insurer administrative expenses and profits alongside payments to injured claimants. Critics including the Economic Policy Institute argue the estimates are inflated and lack context, noting that international comparisons overlook the fact that foreign national health systems absorb medical compensation outside the tort system.²¹

The direction of the trend is less disputed than the dollar labels. From 2010 to 2024, the Consumer Price Index rose nearly 50 percent, while “Other Liability” insurance claims costs increased by 247 percent.⁹ Insurers answer higher losses with higher premiums and tighter coverage limits, and businesses pass those costs to customers or exit markets they can no longer insure affordably.

Plaintiffs who win record verdicts may not keep as much as the headlines suggest. The Triple-I guide offered an illustrative breakdown of a typical award: about 55 percent to the plaintiff, 20 percent to the attorney, 20 percent to a litigation funder, and 5 percent to case costs.²⁰

Is the Crisis Framing Accurate

The industry’s framing has not gone unchallenged. A 2024 RAND Corporation study found evidence consistent with an upsurge beginning around 2014: inflation-adjusted trial awards in personal injury and wrongful death cases grew at a 7.6 percent compound annual rate from 2010 to 2019, plaintiff win rates rose from 53 to 64 percent, and the share of large awards ($5 million or more) nearly doubled.²²

At the same time, insurance claim frequency fell across nearly all market segments during the same period, and the decline was “large enough to nearly or fully offset the increase in severity,” limiting the impact on insurers’ loss ratios.²² RAND also noted that rising awards could reflect factors outside the legal system, like changes in medical practice, injury severity, or the mix of cases being brought, and concluded that “not a great deal of empirical research” exists on whether social inflation is actually occurring.²³

A 2023 paper published through the NAIC by consumer representative Kenneth Klein argued that calls for legal system reform based on social inflation lack “empirical support and analytical comprehensiveness” and warned that such reforms carry a “significant risk” of reducing access to justice for people with legitimate claims.²⁴ Some academics have described a recursive dynamic in which insurers cite social inflation to justify premium hikes, which fuels public resentment of corporations, which in turn makes juries more willing to punish them.²⁵

What States and the Federal Government Are Doing

Florida’s HB 837

Florida’s 2023 tort reform law is the most watched state-level example. Enacted on March 24, 2023, HB 837 moved Florida from pure comparative negligence to a modified system that bars recovery for plaintiffs more than 50 percent at fault. The law cut the general negligence statute of limitations from four years to two, repealed automatic attorney fee recovery for policyholders, restricted contingency fee multipliers, and changed how medical damages are calculated so plaintiffs cannot claim the full billed amount rather than what was actually paid.²⁶

Early results have been pronounced. Auto glass litigation between plaintiffs and insurers fell from 24,720 in the second quarter of 2023 to 2,613 in the second quarter of 2024. Florida’s national rank for nuclear verdict payouts dropped from second (2009–2022) to tenth in 2024. Average insurance rate increases fell from 21 percent in 2023 to a projected 0.2 percent in 2025, and major carriers filed rate decreases: GEICO at 10.5 percent, Progressive at 8.1 percent, and State Farm at 6 percent. Twelve new insurers entered the Florida market after the reforms, following a period in which more than 30 had left.²⁶

Georgia’s SB 68 and SB 69

Georgia followed with reforms signed by Governor Brian Kemp on April 21, 2025. SB 68 limits plaintiffs to recovering the “reasonable value” of medical expenses actually paid or owed, allows defendants to request trials divided into separate phases for liability, compensatory damages, and punitive damages, and bars plaintiff attorneys from suggesting specific dollar figures for noneconomic damages until the close of evidence. The last provision targets the anchoring tactic directly.²⁷

SB 69 addresses litigation funding directly. Starting January 1, 2026, all litigation financiers operating in Georgia must register with the state, disclosing ownership and criminal history. Funders are prohibited from directing legal strategy or settlement decisions, and violations are classified as felonies. Entities associated with “foreign adversaries” are barred from registering. Funding agreements of $25,000 or more are subject to discovery.²⁷

Other States

Colorado enacted a Consumer Legal Funding Act in 2023 regulating funding contracts and capping fees, then followed up in 2024 with a $1.5 million cap on noneconomic damages. Iowa set a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages with provisions for higher caps in severe cases. Indiana, Louisiana, Montana, Missouri, and West Virginia have passed laws requiring disclosure of litigation funding or capping funding fees. Illinois set an 18 percent cap on funding fees assessed every six months.²⁸

Federal Action

The federal response has centered on litigation funding transparency. On February 11, 2026, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senators Thom Tillis, John Kennedy, and John Cornyn introduced the Litigation Funding Transparency Act. The bill would require disclosure of third-party funding, including foreign funding, in mass tort and class action lawsuits, bar funders from influencing litigation strategy or settlement negotiations, and prevent them from accessing material produced in discovery under protective orders. It is backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, and the National Insurance Crime Bureau, among others.²⁹

Separately, the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Civil Rules formed a subcommittee in October 2024 to study whether the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should be amended to require disclosure of litigation funding. At its meeting on October 24, 2025, the committee decided to keep studying the issue without putting forward a specific draft proposal, and it is scheduled to revisit the topic in April 2026.³⁰

With state tort reforms still rolling out, federal disclosure legislation pending, and juries continuing to deliver record verdicts, the contest over who pays for harm in the American legal system is far from settled.

1
arXiv. Social Inflation Definition and Origin
2
The Geneva Association. Social Inflation Brief
3
Swiss Re. Sigma 4/2024 — Social Inflation Driving Liability Claims Costs
4
Gallagher. Social Inflation Nuclear Verdicts Drivers
5
Institute for Legal Reform. Nuclear Verdicts Study
6
EECMA. Nuclear Verdicts Presentation 2025
7
NAIC. Social Inflation
8
Institute for Legal Reform. New ILR Research Looks at Increase of Punitive Damages
9
United Educators. What Is Driving Social Inflation
10
DRI. Social Inflation White Paper
11
Carrier Management. EY Litigation Funding Cost Projections
12
Columbia Law Review. Shadow Tort Law — Lessons From the Reptile
13
Clyde & Co. Litigation Surge and Insurer Strain
14
DRI. Social Inflation
15
Edelman. 2025 Trust Barometer
16
TransRe. Social Inflation Overview 2025
17
Insurance Research Council. Social Inflation Evidence and Impact on Property-Casualty Insurance
18
Swiss Re. Litigation Costs Drive US Liability Claims by 57% Over Past Decade
19
Institute for Legal Reform. Tort Costs in America (Third Edition)
20
Triple-I. A Consumer Guide — How Legal System Abuse Impacts You
21
Economic Policy Institute. Tort Cost Estimates and Critiques
22
RAND Corporation. What Is the Evidence for Social Inflation
23
RAND Corporation. What Is the Evidence for Social Inflation
24
NAIC. The Case for Pausing Any Immediate Embrace of the Social Inflation Argument
25
Wiley Online Library. Social Inflation and the P&C Insurance Industry
26
Milliman. How Tort Reform Is Shaping Insurance Claims — Florida and Georgia
27
DLA Piper. Georgia Enacts Sweeping Tort Reform
28
CSG South. States Race to Debate Litigation Reform
29
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Grassley Proposes Third-Party Litigation Funding Reform
30
Dechert. Advisory Committee Advances Litigation Funding Review