Colorado’s Supreme Court has upheld a $40 million medical malpractice verdict in Banner Health v. Gresser, a catastrophic-injury case that challenged the boundaries of the state’s damages framework. By affirming the jury’s award, the Court reinforced that Colorado’s statutory caps under the Health Care Availability Act do not prevent juries from determining full damages in the most severe cases—particularly when lifelong disability or extensive future care is involved. This decision effectively clears the path for high-severity verdicts to stand when the underlying harm is profound, even in a jurisdiction that traditionally relied on structured limits to moderate outcomes.
The ruling arrives at a moment when severity pressure is already rising nationwide, and it puts Colorado firmly in the category of states where “cap-protected” venues can still produce outlier judgments. For hospitals and large physician groups, this signals a judicial environment more willing to defer to jury assessments of long-term needs rather than compressing damages into statutory ceilings. For specialty practices performing high-risk procedures, the message is equally direct: catastrophic cases may be rare, but when they occur, courts are showing less inclination to intervene.
GET THE SUMMIT
Sign up for news and stuff all about the stuff you wanna know about in your sector twice a month.
