Is There a Cap on Pain and Suffering Damages in Georgia Medical Malpractice Cases?
On this page
No enforceable one. The statute, O.C.G.A. § 51-13-1, still sets a $350,000 limit, but the Supreme Court of Georgia held in 2010 that applying it to pain and suffering in a malpractice case violates the right to a jury trial, and in June 2026 it reaffirmed that holding and ruled that the cap cannot be applied to any verdict that includes such damages. One question remains undecided: a wrongful death verdict with no pain-and-suffering award.
What the statute says
Section 51-13-1 was enacted in the Tort Reform Act of 2005. It limits noneconomic damages “in a medical malpractice action, including an action for wrongful death”:
| Defendants | Limit on noneconomic damages |
|---|---|
| One or more health care providers | $350,000 total |
| A single medical facility | $350,000 |
| More than one medical facility | $700,000 |
| Health care providers and medical facilities together | $1,050,000 |
“Noneconomic damages” covers pain, suffering, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium, and “all other nonpecuniary losses”. The limits are as described by the Supreme Court in Nestlehutt (2010); economic losses such as medical bills and lost wages are not capped by this statute.
Nestlehutt: the cap cannot limit pain and suffering
In Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt (2010), a patient permanently disfigured after laser resurfacing and a facelift was awarded $900,000 for pain and suffering, and her husband $250,000 for loss of consortium; applying the cap would have cut those noneconomic damages by $800,000. The Supreme Court of Georgia held the cap unconstitutional under the Georgia Constitution’s guarantee that “the right to trial by jury shall remain inviolate”, because a jury could award such damages in a malpractice-type claim when the constitution was adopted in 1798.
Turner (2025): wrongful death sent back
In The Medical Center of Central Georgia, Inc. v. Turner (2025), a jury awarded about $7.2 million in noneconomic damages “for wrongful death”. The lower courts had read Nestlehutt as covering that award. The Supreme Court vacated, holding that the lower courts had not applied the claim-specific historical framework Nestlehutt requires to a statutory wrongful death claim, and remanded without deciding the constitutional question.
Clark v. Leigh (June 16, 2026): Nestlehutt stands, and the cap fails on mixed verdicts
In Clark v. Leigh, a Bibb County jury awarded $29,250,000 for the full value of a woman’s life, $2,500,000 to her estate for her pain and suffering, and $1,715,176 in medical expenses after complications from surgery. The trial court cut the wrongful death award to $350,000. The Supreme Court of Georgia vacated that reduction:
- It declined to overrule Nestlehutt, relying on stare decisis.
- It read § 51-13-1(b) as one mechanism that adds all noneconomic damages for all claimants and claims into a single “total amount recoverable” and limits that sum to $350,000. The statute has no way to cap only the wrongful death part.
- Because the verdict included pain and suffering that cannot constitutionally be capped, the Court held the cap “cannot apply at all to a verdict that includes damages to which Nestlehutt’s holding applies”.
The Court stated that “we need not and do not decide most of the constitutional questions raised by the parties”, which leaves open whether the jury-trial right protects a wrongful death claim on its own.
What this means for a claim
| Malpractice verdict includes | Cap applies? |
|---|---|
| Pain and suffering for the injured patient | No (Nestlehutt) |
| Wrongful death damages plus the estate's pre-death pain and suffering | No (Clark v. Leigh) |
| Wrongful death damages only, with no pain-and-suffering award | Not decided (Turner remanded; Clark left it open) |
| Claim against the State under the Tort Claims Act | A separate limit applies: § 50-21-29 caps recovery at $1 million per person for a single occurrence and $3 million in total per occurrence |
Punitive damages are governed by a different statute and a different cap; see when punitive damages are available in Georgia. The broader history of the 2005 law is covered in what Georgia’s 2005 tort reform changed, and how “full value of the life” is measured in the full value of the life in a Georgia wrongful death case.
Sources
- O.C.G.A. §§ 50-21-29, 51-13-1.
- Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt, 286 Ga. 731 (2010)
- The Medical Center of Central Georgia, Inc. v. Turner, 322 Ga. 129 (2025)
- Clark v. Leigh, 324 Ga. 733 (2026)
General information about Georgia law as of October 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.