In California, the only time there is a damage cap in a personal injury case is for non-economic damages in medical malpractice claims.
Now that Assembly Bill 35 passed, starting in 2024, the non-economic damages cap will be $390,000 in non-death cases and $550,000 in wrongful death cases.
Then the caps will increase incrementally through 2033 to $750,000 in non-death cases to $1 million in wrongful death cases. (This bill is not retroactive and applies only to cases filed on January 1, 2023 or after. For cases before 2023, the cap is $250,000.)
These non-economic damages include compensation for
- pain and suffering,
- loss of consortium, and
- loss of enjoyment of life.
Are there damage caps in California personal injury cases?
Generally, there are no damage caps for personal injury cases in California. However, there is one important exception: As of January 1, 2024, non-economic damages are capped at $390,000 in non-fatal medical malpractice claims and $550,000 in fatal medical malpractice claims.1
Each new year, the cap in non-fatal cases will increase by $40,000 until it reaches $750,000. In fatal cases, the cap will increase each new year by $50,000 until it reaches $1 million:
| Non-economic damages cap in California | Non-fatal medical malpractice cases | Fatal medical malpractice cases |
| 2023 | $350,000 | $500,000 |
| 2024 | $390,000 | $550,000 |
| 2025 | $430,000 | $600,000 |
| 2026 | $470,000 | $650,000 |
| 2027 | $510,000 | $700,000 |
| 2028 | $550,000 | $750,000 |
| 2029 | $590,000 | $800,000 |
| 2030 | $630,000 | $850,000 |
| 2031 | $670,000 | $90,000 |
| 2032 | $710,000 | $950,000 |
| 2033 | $750,000 | $1,000,000 |
A damage cap limits how much compensation a victim can recover for his or her losses. It puts a cap on how much the victim will be awarded, even if he or she has suffered severe injuries and deserves far more.
For the most part, there are no damage caps in personal injury cases brought in California. The personal injury cases that have no damage caps include claims for injuries that happened due to a(n):
In these cases, victims can recover all of the compensation that they deserve for their injuries.
Medical malpractice claims are an exception, though. California lawmakers have singled these types of lawsuits out for a cap on damages.2 This medical malpractice damage cap comes from the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, or MICRA. This tort reform act went into effect in 1975.
What is a medical malpractice case?
A medical malpractice case is a type of personal injury lawsuit. It involves the negligence of a healthcare provider in the course of rendering medical care that the professional is licensed to provide. If that medical negligence is the proximate cause of an injury or wrongful death, the medical professional and his or her medical institution may be held liable for the result. Victims can hold them liable through a medical malpractice claim.3
Medical malpractice claims can be filed against medical professionals, individually, or the professional’s medical institution. Potential defendants include:
- doctors,
- nurses,
- hospitals,
- doctor’s offices,
- pharmacists,
- pharmacies,
- anesthesiologists,
- psychologists, and
- laboratories.
Some common examples of medical malpractice situations include:
- failing to diagnose a readily diagnosable medical condition,
- performing surgery on the wrong body part,
- operating on the wrong patient,
- giving the wrong drugs to the patient, and
- leaving surgical equipment inside the patient.
Many of these instances of malpractice are severe or life-threatening. Some are fatal. That victims in California are only allowed to recover a limited amount to cover their non-economic damages is often seen as controversial.
What are non-economic damages?
Non-economic damages are a form of compensation for accident victims. It covers their:
- pain,
- suffering,
- emotional distress,
- loss of quality of life,
- loss of consortium for their loved ones,
- emotional trauma for disfigurement, and
- loss of life’s enjoyments due to a disability.
Under California law, there are 2 types of legal damages:
Compensatory damages are those that are meant to make the victim whole, once again. They compensate the victim for all of the ways that they have suffered from the accident.
Punitive damages are those that are meant to punish the defendant for especially wrongful conduct. If they are awarded, they result in a windfall for the victim. However, they are extremely rare in cases based on accidents that were caused by the defendant’s negligence.
Compensatory damages are further broken down into 2 categories:
- economic damages, and
- non-economic damages.
Economic damages compensate the victim for losses that are easy to state in an amount of money. They generally cover expenses that can be found on a bill or a receipt. They include compensation for the victim’s:
- medical bills, including reasonably anticipated future medical expenses,
- lost income,
- loss of earning capacity, and
- property damage.
Non-economic damages compensate the victim for things that are not easy to put into a dollar amount, like:
- physical pain and suffering,
- mental anguish,
- emotional distress from the injured patient’s impairments, and
- the loss of consortium felt by the victim’s family.
In many cases, especially severe instances of medical malpractice, the amount of a victim’s non-economic damages can far surpass his or her economic damages. Personal injury attorneys often use the “multiplier method” to estimate how much compensation a victim will recover for his or her non-economic losses. Under this method, all of the victim’s economic damages are added together. The resulting number is then multiplied by between 1 and 5 to estimate the victim’s non-economic damage award. The more severe the victim’s injuries, the higher the number used by personal injury lawyers.
The wide range used for the multiplier method reflects just how difficult it is to guess how a potential jury will react to your claim. Jury awards for pain and suffering damages in personal injury claims are infamously inconsistent. However, the high numbers show just how controversial it is to institute non-economic damage caps in California medical malpractice cases.4
Additional resources
For more in-depth information, refer to these scholarly articles:
- Statutory Punitive Damage Caps and the Profit Motive: An Economic Perspective – Emory Law Journal.
- Controlling Large Malpractice Claims: The Unexpected Impact of Damage Caps – Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law.
- Damage Caps, Motivated Anchoring, and Bargaining Impasse – The Journal of Legal Studies.
- A Tale of Three Damage Caps: Too Much, Too Little and Finally Just Right – Case Western Reserve Law Review.
- Damage Caps and Settlement: A Behavioral Approach – The Journal of Legal Studies.
Legal References:
- California Civil Code 3333.2 CIV. See also Assembly Bill 35.
- Same.
- See California Civil Code 3333.1(2) CIV and California Code of Civil Procedure 340.5(2) CCP.
- Fein v. Permanente Medical Group, 38 Cal.3d 137 (1985).
