The debate over putting caps on the amount of damages that can be awarded in a medical malpractice lawsuit is heating up both at the state court and Supreme Court level. Only a month after the highest court in Illinois ruled that caps on noneconomic (i.e. pain and suffering) damages were unconstitutional, Georgia was quick to follow their lead. Last April, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled unanimously (7 to 0) that caps on medical malpractice damages are unconstitutional because they "violate the separation of court and legislature, and take away a jury's fundamental role in determining damages.

The Georgia case initially resulted in a jury awarding $1.3 million in damages to a woman who was disfigured during a botched plastic surgery. The verdict included $115,000 for past and future medical expenses; $900,000 in noneconomic damages for the woman's pain and suffering; and $250,000 for her husband's loss of consortium.

However, due to Georgia law that states that no individual can collect damages in excess of $350,000 for non economic damages, the woman's initial award was reduced substantially. As a result the woman appealed the judgment to the Georgia Supreme Court, arguing that the law was unconstitutional and they agreed. The high court expressed that "the existence of the caps, in any amount...violates the right to trial by jury."

Currently, 30 states have caps on damages in malpractice cases. California was the first state to enact this law in 1975, aiming to lower malpractice insurance premiums. Shortly after, many other states followed suit.

Related Resources: