After California’s voters retained the $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases in November, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear a case challenging the 1975 law that establishes the cap. The law in question, the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA), is similar to laws that have been already tossed out by the highest courts of eight other states. The cap applies to noneconomic damages only, so if you or someone you love is injured in a medicinal malpractice incident, nothing stops you from suing for your medicinal expenses and related damages, but in southern California you’ll need the help of an experienced Pasadena medical malpractice attorney.
In November, California voters rejected Proposition 46, which would have raised the $250,000 cap to $1.1 million and indexed it to inflation. Those who supported the proposition say the cap doesn’t fairly compensate injured individuals such as children and stay-at-home parents who may not be eligible for employment-related economic damages. The case that the California Supreme Court will hear, Hughes v. Pham, challenges the constitutionality of the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act. Plaintiffs assert that the cap violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and the separation of powers doctrine by allowing the legislative branch to usurp the authority of the courts to decide personal injury cases and enter judgments.
In Pasadena, Los Angeles, or anywhere else in southern California, if you are injured in a medical malpractice incident, you have the right to be compensated for your additional medicinal treatment, your lost income, and any other injury-related expenses. In fact, if you’ve been injured in a surgical procedure, by a misdiagnosis, or by receiving the wrong medication, don’t wait. Discuss your legal rights and options – including a medical malpractice lawsuit – at once with an experienced Pasadena medical malpractice attorney.