There needs to be some more nuanced reporting on this issue.  It doesn't suffice to say that the lawyers were just lining their nest here if, at the same, the foster care payment settlement was killed by the same lawyers because the fees were too large.

To evaluate the effect of limited liability protections for lifeguards, we need to see how many suits had been filed before the law was first passed in 2002, and how much it cost to settle them or fund judgments following trial when the burden of proof was mere negligence.  Then we'd need to see how many cases were brought, and how they were resolved, during the 15 years the limited liability protections were in effect.  That would tell us how increasing the burden of proof to gross negligence changed the number and size of lawsuits and payouts.

If nothing changed, maybe the law wasn't needed.  If a lot changed, maybe it should at least have been extended.  Policy decisions should be evidence-based, not driven by vague assertions.