The Elimination of the Cap
On June 16, 2026, the Supreme Court of Georgia issued a significant decision in the closely watched case, Clark v. Leigh. The court reversed a Bibb County trial court decision that reduced a $29.25 million verdict to $350,000 under OCGA § 51-13-1. The statute incorporates all non-economic damages and does not provide for carving out of any individual claim. The $29.25 million was awarded for the full value of the life of April Clark, a 41-year-old female who died from complications from a bowel perforation that occurred during the removal of an ovarian cyst in June 2019. Following the verdict, the defendants argued that the medical malpractice damages cap applied, and the court agreed, reducing the award to $350,000. The Supreme Court, in its decision, did not reinstate the $29.25 million award but remanded the case to the lower court to decide whether the verdict award was excessive.
Georgia’s Wrongful Death Framework and the Role of Non-Economic Damages
The linchpin by which the recovery of non-economic damages in Georgia is evaluated is codified in O.C.G.A § 51-13-1(b), which states that “[i]n any verdict returned or judgment entered in a medical malpractice action, including an action for wrongful death, against one or more health care providers, the total amount recoverable by a claimant for noneconomic damages in such action shall be limited to an amount not to exceed $350,000.00, regardless of the number of defendant health care providers against whom the claim is asserted or the number of separate causes of action on which the claim is based.”
In understanding the court’s recent decision in Clark, it is important to understand the backdrop by which the court reached its decision. That is, in reaching its decision in Clark, the court reaffirmed the framework set out in Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt, 286 Ga. 731 (2010).
Decided by the court on March 22, 2010, Nestlehutt involved a medical malpractice action brought by Betty Nestlehutt and her husband against Dr. Harvey P. Cole of Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, following complications from cosmetic surgery that resulted in Ms. Nestlehutt’s permanent disfigurement. The jury awarded the Nestlehutts $1,265,000, which included $900,000 in non-economic damages for pain and suffering. However, O.C.G.A. § 51–13–1 capped non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases at $350,000. The trial court declared this statutory cap unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed this decision.
In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court found that the statutory cap on non-economic damages violated the Georgia Constitution’s guarantee of the right to a jury trial emphasizing that the right to a jury trial includes the right to have a jury determine the amount of damages, including non-economic damages, which are traditionally within the jury’s purview. The court concluded that the cap nullified the jury’s findings and undermined its basic function, thus infringing on the constitutional right to a jury trial.
The Decision
In its decision in Clark, which can be found here, the Georgia Supreme Court reaffirmed its landmark 2010 decision in Nestlehutt.
Although the court left some questions unresolved, the court explained at great length why the damages cap could not be applied in this case. According to the court, certain non-economic damages are covered by Nestlehutt and cannot be constitutionally capped. It declined the opportunity to separate the damages and said that doing so would require rewriting of the statute. Despite the unanimous decision, however, the court did indicate that there were internal doubts as to whether Nestlehutt was correct.
What Defendants Should Expect Moving Forward
Undoubtedly, the most recent decision in Clark favors plaintiff attorneys looking to recover large verdicts in wrongful death actions within the state. By its decision, the court has effectively removed a potential limitation on plaintiffs’ recovery and may embolden plaintiffs’ attorneys with greater leverage to argue that a jury could award substantial non-economic damages in their case, should it go to trial.
However, it is important to note that the court’s recent decision in Clark does not alter plaintiffs’ burden to prove breach of the standard of care or causation. For defense attorneys, the new no cap ruling does not mean no defense. While the ruling increases potential damages exposure, it does not eliminate the plaintiff’s burden to prove liability, as liability still ultimately drives case value and damages must be proven.
Looking Ahead
The question if wrongful death damages alone can be capped remains unanswered, leaving the door open for future litigation testing the issue.
Nevertheless, some things are certain. Before, the most recent decision caps created a valuation ceiling for plaintiffs seeking to recover non-economic damages in Georgia wrongful death cases. After the Clark decision, case valuation becomes more about perceived liability exposure, risk tolerance, and potential jury pools.