Which states cap pain and suffering, the dollar amounts, the medical-malpractice carve-outs, constitutional status, and a worked example of how a cap actually moves your settlement number.
This site is operated by Mustafa Bilgic, an individual based in Adiyaman, Turkiye. The operator is NOT a licensed attorney and does NOT provide legal advice. This site provides informational state-by-state references compiled from state statute publishers, the National Conference of State Legislatures medical-malpractice tracking, and state Supreme Court opinions. State caps change. Always verify the current statute and the controlling state Supreme Court opinions before relying on a figure.
Address: Malazgirt No: 225, Adiyaman, Turkiye
Email: [email protected]
Non-economic damages are compensation for losses that do not have a market price tag. They include pain, suffering, mental anguish, inconvenience, embarrassment, loss of enjoyment of life, disfigurement, and loss of consortium. They are distinct from economic damages, which cover medical bills, lost wages, property damage, future care, and any other loss with a documented dollar value. Economic and non-economic damages are taxed differently and capped differently. The discussion that follows is about non-economic damages only.
Caps come in three flavors. General caps apply to all personal injury cases regardless of the underlying tort. Medical-malpractice caps apply only to medical negligence claims, which is by far the most common kind of cap. Government-defendant caps apply to claims against state, municipal, or public entities under tort claims acts. A claim can simultaneously be subject to all three caps if, for example, a state university hospital commits medical malpractice.
Most states have no general cap on non-economic damages in routine personal injury cases. A small number of states do. A representative 2026 list (verify before relying):
Medical-malpractice caps are far more common than general caps. The National Conference of State Legislatures medical malpractice reform tracker is a useful reference. A 2026 sample:
| State | 2026 medmal cap (non-econ) | Statute | Constitutional status |
|---|---|---|---|
| California (MICRA) | $350,000-$750,000 depending on injury, inflation-stepped through 2033 to $750,000/$1,000,000 | Cal. Civ. Code section 3333.2 | Statutory framework upheld; 2022 amendments |
| Texas | $250,000 per defendant, $500,000 aggregate | Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code section 74.301 | Upheld (Tex. Const. amendment) |
| Florida | Cap struck down (Estate of McCall, 2014; North Broward Hospital District v. Kalitan, 2017) | Fla. Stat. ch. 766 (former cap) | Unconstitutional |
| Indiana | Total damages cap $2,250,000; Patient Compensation Fund pays over $500,000 per claim | Ind. Code section 34-18-14 | Upheld |
| Maryland | Approximately $935,000, inflation-adjusted (subject to additional medmal cap structure) | Md. Cts. and Jud. Proc. section 3-2A-09 | Upheld |
| Massachusetts | $500,000 (with exception for serious permanent disability) | Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231 section 60H | Upheld |
| Michigan | Approximately $300,000-$600,000 inflation-adjusted; higher tier for paralysis or permanent severe injury | MCL section 600.1483 | Upheld |
| Nevada | $350,000 (with stepped increase under 2023 reform) | NRS section 41A.035 | Upheld |
| North Carolina | Approximately $562,338 in 2026, inflation-adjusted | N.C. Gen. Stat. section 90-21.19 | Upheld |
| Ohio | $250,000 or 3x economic damages, capped at $350,000 per plaintiff; higher tier for catastrophic injury | Ohio Rev. Code section 2323.43 | Upheld in general; carve-outs litigated |
| Oklahoma | Cap struck down (Beason v. I.E. Miller Services, 2019) | Former Okla. Stat. tit. 23 section 61.2 | Unconstitutional |
| Tennessee | $750,000 general / $1,000,000 catastrophic | Tenn. Code section 29-39-102 | Upheld |
| Wisconsin | $750,000 medmal cap upheld (Mayo v. Wisconsin Injured Patients, 2018) | Wis. Stat. section 893.55(4)(d) | Upheld |
Statutory citations are illustrative. Always retrieve the current statute text. For California, the controlling provision is California Civil Code section 3333.2. For Texas, see Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 74. For Florida, see Florida Statutes Chapter 768 (former cap was struck down).
Consider a medical-malpractice case in Texas. The economic damages are documented at $640,000 (past medical $180,000, future medical $290,000, lost earning capacity $170,000). The jury awards $1,800,000 in non-economic damages. Under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 74.301, the non-economic award is capped at $250,000 against a single defendant physician, with a $500,000 aggregate against all providers, plus a separate $250,000 cap against any single healthcare institution.
The cap removed $1,550,000 from the verdict. Settlement value follows that math. An insurer in Texas knows the jury exposure on non-economic damages is bounded by the cap, and will not pay a settlement number that ignores it.
Caps have been struck down in several states on state constitutional grounds:
Most states maintain a separate cap when the defendant is a public entity. Examples:
Some state caps are inflation-adjusted; some are not. Maryland's cap rises with consumer price index annually. Colorado's cap is adjusted by a statutory formula. California's MICRA cap was static for 47 years before the 2022 reform, which now phases in increases through 2033 and indexes thereafter. The practical impact is significant: a case worth $750,000 in non-economic damages today may be worth a higher number five years from now under an inflation-adjusted cap and the same number under a static cap. When you read a 2026 cap figure, always check whether the statute carries an inflation provision and whether the current adjustment has been published by the state administrative office of courts or the state insurance department.
Caps and comparative fault apply in a specific order. Most states apply the cap before comparative fault is deducted; some apply comparative fault first and the cap second. The order matters. A $1 million non-economic verdict, 30% comparative fault, and a $300,000 cap produces $300,000 if the cap is applied first (then no further reduction since the cap is below the post-fault $700,000), or $700,000 reduced to the $300,000 cap if comparative fault applies first. Different states reach the same result here, but other fact patterns can produce material differences. The order is set by statute or controlling case law; check before relying on a number. See the related guide on comparative and contributory negligence by state.
Five questions to answer before you rely on a cap number:
Most states have no general cap in routine personal injury cases but many cap medical-malpractice non-economic damages. Texas, California, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and several others maintain medmal caps. Florida, Kansas, Oklahoma, Georgia, Missouri, and Illinois have had caps struck down by their state Supreme Courts at various points.
Caps directly bind a court at verdict. They affect settlements indirectly because settlement value tracks expected trial outcomes. Insurers in a capped state will not pay a settlement that ignores the trial ceiling on non-economic damages.
Generally no, except in workers compensation, government-defendant cases, and a few specific state tort categories. Medical bills, lost wages, and future care are usually fully recoverable. The cap targets non-economic damages.
Usually no. In most states the cap is applied by the court after the verdict. The jury awards a number, and the judge reduces it if the cap applies. Some states permit limited cap instructions; check local rules.
No. This is general educational information. SettlementCalculator is operated by Mustafa Bilgic, a non-attorney individual operator. Consult a licensed attorney in your state for the controlling statute, current case law, and any cap challenge before relying on a number for settlement.