Lawyers Seek Ban on Secret Agreements

A lawyers group is urging lawmakers to ban confidential settlements it says endanger the public by keeping dangerous products or practices secret.

The agreements, which bar both sides from discussing a settlement publicly, are frequently used to settle lawsuits.

But when the agreements are also used to hide information about “public hazards,” the effort to protect a company’s reputation can come at the expense of safety, supporters of a ban said.

“It’s hush money,” Douglas K. Sheff of Boston and president of the Massachusetts chapter of the American Trial Lawyers Association, told The Boston Globe. The association plans to file a bill on Beacon Hill this month. Sheff is also president of the Massachusetts Academy of Trial Attorneys.

The bill has other backers in the Massachusetts legal community.

“If throughout the course of a lawsuit, a certain product or drug or feature of an automobile is exposed as hazardous, that is a public safety question,” said Edward P. Ryan Jr., president of the Massachusetts Bar Association.

Not everyone agrees.

Corporate lawyers, business groups and insurers say confidentiality agreements are needed to protect trade secrets, safeguard corporate reputations and allow companies to settle lawsuits without protracted and expensive legal battles.

Defenders of confidentiality agreements say they not only protect a company’s reputation, but also discourage frivolous product liability claims.

“Defendants have concerns that, when numbers are bandied about, they may be subjected to more suits,” said Springfield attorney Paul F. Schneider. “This may discourage settlements altogether.”

Fifteen other states have approved similar laws.