Federal Judge Criticizes But Upholds Mississippi Damages Cap

A federal judge has upheld Mississippi’s cap of $500,000 on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases.

The ruling came in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a woman and her unborn baby who died after being denied potential lifesaving treatment at a government hospital on the Choctaw Reservation.

U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves applied the caps in the case, finding that his hands were tied and the state’s Supreme Court would likely find the caps constitutional.

But Reeves found fault with the caps and what he perceived as their unfairness.

“All grief is not equal. All pain cannot be reduced to a one-size-fits-all sum. In Mississippi, though, one’s suffering at the hands of a health care provider is worth no more than half a million dollars, no matter how egregious, and no matter if your suffering leads to your death, your unborn child’s death, and leaves your children orphans. This is offensive,” Reeves wrote in upholding the limits.

Michael T. Jaques, an attorney for plaintiff Kathy Clemons, said an appeal is being considered. “This is a unique case in that it was the judge — not a jury — that awarded the damages against the United States in an amount that would compensate the victims for their loss,” Jaques said.

In an Oct. 30, 2012, ruling, Reeves awarded $5.45 million in non-economic damages and $1.8 million in economic damages. However, before making the award final, Reeves asked both sides to address the question of Mississippi’s $1 million cap on non-economic damages.

Clemons’ attorneys argued there was no guarantee that the Mississippi Supreme Court would uphold the damage limits if it had a case on which to rule. Without that guarantee, Clemons argued Reeves should declare the limits unconstitutional.

On June 13, Reeves imposed the limits on non-economic damages of $500,000 each for Tiara Clemons and her unborn child. He kept economic damages at $1.8 million.

Reeves said the law has “a discriminatory effect” on Clemons and her family, “leaving them without adequate remedy for their very real, serious injuries.” But, he wrote, doubts about a statute’s constitutionality have to be resolved in favor of the law.