In a Colorado medical malpractice case, Chance and Erin Gresser, on behalf of their minor daughter, C.G., sought to recover the full amount of damages awarded by the jury, which exceeds the $1 million cap imposed by the Health Care Availability Act (“HCAA”), §§ 13-64-101 to -503, C.R.S. (2025). The trial court found good cause to exceed the cap and concluded that imposing the cap would be unfair. The court entered judgment for the full amount of the jury award, plus pre- and post-filing interest, which totaled nearly $40 million.
Under the HCAA, a jury calculates the amount of damages without being instructed on the cap, but the court
presumptively limits the award to $1 million if the jury’s calculation exceeds that amount. § 13-64-302(1)(b). However, the legislature provided an exception under which a plaintiff may challenge the imposition of the $1 million cap: “if, upon good cause shown, the court determines that the present value of past and future economic damages would exceed such limitation and that the application of such limitation would be unfair, the court may award in excess of the limitation the present value of additional past and future economic damages only.” Subsection 302(1)(b).
In its October 20, 2025 Opinion, the Colorado Supreme Court held: “We hold that once a court has determined, under section 13-64-302(1)(b), C.R.S. (2025) (“subsection 302(1)(b)”), that the plaintiff has established good cause to exceed the HCAA’s damages cap and that imposing the cap would be unfair, the court’s subsequent determination as to the
proper amount of damages is governed by common law; meaning, under subsection 302(1)(b)’s exception, the jury retains its authority to determine the amount of damages, subject only to the court’s remittitur authority and its
authority to review the award for the sufficiency of the evidence … we conclude that the legislature didn’t intend to completely abrogate the jury’s common-law authority to determine damages in medical malpractice cases. Instead, if a court determines that subsection 302(1)(b)’s exception applies, it should defer to the jury’s common-law authority to determine damages, subject to the court’s continuing authority to review the sufficiency of the evidence and to entertain certain narrow excessive-amount challenges … Here, after determining that subsection 302(1)(b)’s exception applied, the trial court reviewed the record and found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s damages award and that the award wasn’t grossly and manifestly excessive. It then entered judgment for the jury’s full damages award. We perceive no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s findings and therefore, like the division, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.”
Source Banner Health v. Gresse, No. 23SC959.
If you or a loved one were injured (or worse) as a result of medical negligence in Colorado or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a Colorado medical malpractice lawyer, or a local medical malpractice lawyer in your state, who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Visit our website or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice attorneys in Colorado or in your U.S. state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.