As campaign season heats up, it’s not just the presidential race that Colorado voters are being asked to consider. Several initiatives that would significantly impact personal injury cases might also make it onto local ballot papers. To find out the latest, keep an eye on this blog as we examine the initiatives over coming weeks and months.
One of these measures is Initiative 150, which has caught the attention of many as it pits Colorado legal and medical professionals against each other, and could see a big money showdown in the lead up to the November election.
If successful, the initiative, which is being supported by the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association (CTLA), will remove the cap on “non-economic” damages in court cases, which could be awarded by a judge or jury if someone suffers a “catastrophic injury” or “wrongful death.”
Non-economic damage caps have long been a point of contention in Colorado. Trial attorneys argue that existing caps limit restitution victims can receive, while business leaders and doctors warn that excessive verdicts could cause employers or insurers to leave Colorado.
However, the initiative is tired up in the Colorado Supreme Court and might not be put to voters.
Petitioners to the court have argued it shouldn’t be allowed to proceed because it would violate a “host of damage-related laws”, “lower the burden of proof” in personal injury cases and “remove the judiciary’s oversight over punitive damages”.
Non-economic damages include physical and mental pain and suffering, inconvenience, emotional stress, and quality of life impairment, and are currently capped in Colorado at $642,180. If a court finds clear and convincing evidence warranting an increase, the court can award up to $1,284,370 in non-economic damages.
If successful, the initiative would not apply to cases that involve ski areas, sellers and servers of alcohol, or entities covered by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.
In Colorado, there is no cap on the recovery of economic damages or damages for physical impairment or disfigurement.
In a post on X, formerly called Twitter, the CTLA this month said: “The campaign to place Initiative #150 on Colorado’s Nov ballot has hit a milestone: signature gathering! Yesterday marked the beginning, capturing the momentous occasion with the first two signers, jumpstarting the mission to gather nearly 125,000 signatures for ballot inclusion.”
However, the Colorado Medical Society is opposed to the initiative saying for health care in Colorado to remain both affordable and accessible for patients and providers, a balanced liability climate is essential.
“If the cap on non-economic damages is eliminated as proposed in these initiatives, the cost of liability insurance for providers and health care facilities will be significantly impacted. This will drive up costs to a point where Colorado will no longer be an attractive place to practice medicine,” the society says.
