Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 13
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302 (2026)

Limitation of liability - interest on damages - definition

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) (a) As used in this section: (I) "Derivative noneconomic loss or injury" means noneconomic loss or injury to persons other than the person suffering the direct or primary loss or injury. "Derivative noneconomic loss or injury" does not include punitive or exemplary damages. (II) (A) "Direct noneconomic loss or injury" means nonpecuniary harm for which damages are recoverable by the person suffering the direct or primary loss or injury, including pain and suffering, inconvenience, emotional stress, physical impairment or disfigurement, and impairment of the quality of life. "Direct noneconomic loss or injury" does not include punitive or exemplary damages. (B) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a recovery for economic damages, whether past or future, resulting from physical impairment or disfigurement. (b) The total amount recoverable for all damages for a course of care for all defendants in any civil action for damages in tort brought against a health-care professional, as defined in section 13-64-202, or a health-care institution, as defined in section 13-64-202, or as a result of binding arbitration, whether past damages, future damages, or a combination of both, shall not exceed the greater of one million dollars, present value per patient, or one hundred twenty-five percent of the noneconomic damages limitations set forth in section 13- 21-203 (1)(b) in effect at the time the acts or omissions occurred, present value per patient, including any claim for derivative noneconomic loss or injury, of which not more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars, present value per patient, including any derivative claim, shall be attributable to direct or derivative noneconomic loss or injury; except that, if, upon good cause shown, the court determines that the present value of past and future economic damages would exceed such limitation and that the application of such limitation would be unfair, the court may award in excess of the limitation the present value of additional past and future economic damages only. The limitations of this section are not applicable to a health-care professional who is a public employee under the "Colorado Governmental Immunity Act" and are not applicable to a certified health-care institution which is a public entity under the "Colorado Governmental Immunity Act". For purposes of this section, "present value" has the same meaning as that set forth in section 13-64-202 (7). The existence of the limitations and exceptions thereto provided in this section shall not be disclosed to a jury. (1) (c) (I) (A) Effective July 1, 2003, the damages limitation of two hundred fifty thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(b) of this section shall be increased to three hundred thousand dollars, which increased amount shall apply to acts or omissions occurring on or after said date. It is the intent of the general assembly that the increase reflect an adjustment for inflation to the damages limitation. (B) Effective January 1, 2025, in an action filed on or after that date that accrued on or after January 1, 2024, but before January 1, 2026, the damages limitation of three hundred thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(c)(I)(A) of this section for direct or derivative noneconomic loss or injury is increased to four hundred fifteen thousand dollars. (C) Effective January 1, 2026, the damages limitation of four hundred fifteen thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(c)(I)(B) of this section is increased to five hundred thirty thousand dollars, which increased amount applies to acts or omissions occurring on or after January 1, 2026, but before January 1, 2027. (D) Effective January 1, 2027, the damages limitation of five hundred thirty thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(c)(I)(C) of this section is increased to six hundred forty-five thousand dollars, which increased amount applies to acts or omissions occurring on or after January 1, 2027, but before January 1, 2028. (E) Effective January 1, 2028, the damages limitation of six hundred forty-five thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(c)(I)(D) of this section is increased to seven hundred sixty thousand dollars, which increased amount applies to acts or omissions occurring on or after January 1, 2028, but before January 1, 2029. (F) Effective January 1, 2029, the damages limitation of seven hundred sixty thousand dollars described in subsection (1)(c)(I)(E) of this section is increased to eight hundred seventy- five thousand dollars, which increased amount applies to acts or omissions occurring on or after January 1, 2029, but before January 1, 2030. (G) Effective January 1, 2030, the damages limitation in subsection (1)(c)(I)(F) of this section must be adjusted for inflation as of January 1, 2030, and on January 1 every two years thereafter. The adjustments made on January 1, 2030, and on January 1 every two years thereafter must be based on the cumulative annual adjustment for inflation for each year since the effective date of the damages limitation specified in subsection (1)(c)(I)(F) of this section. The adjustments made pursuant to this subsection (1)(c)(I)(G) must be rounded upward or downward to the nearest ten-dollar increment. As used in this subsection (1)(c), "inflation" means the annual percentage change in the United States department of labor's bureau of labor statistics consumer price index for Denver-Aurora-Lakewood for all items paid by all urban consumers, or its successor index. (II) The secretary of state shall certify the adjusted limitation on damages within fourteen days after the appropriate information is available and shall publish the adjusted amount on the secretary of state's website. (III) The adjusted limitation on damages as of January 1, 2030, and on January 1 every two years thereafter is applicable to acts or omissions occurring on and after the specified January 1 and before the January 1 two years thereafter. (2) In any civil action described in subsection (1) of this section, prejudgment interest awarded pursuant to section 13-21-101 that accrues during the time period beginning on the date the action accrued and ending on the date of filing of the civil action is deemed to be a part of the damages awarded in the action for the purposes of this section and is included within each of the limitations on liability that are established pursuant to subsection (1) of this section.

Source: L. 88: Entire article added, p. 619, § 1, effective July 1. L. 95: Entire section amended, p. 317, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2003: (1) amended, p. 1788, § 4, effective July 1. L. 2004: (1)(a)(I), (1)(a)(II)(A), and (1)(b) amended, p. 501, § 2, effective January 1, 2005. L. 2024: (1)(b) and (1)(c) amended, (HB 24-1472), ch. 325, p. 2176, § 6, effective January 1, 2025.

Cross references: (1) For the "Colorado Governmental Immunity Act", see article 10 of title 24. (2) For the legislative declaration contained in the 2004 act amending subsections (1)(a)(I), (1)(a)(II)(A), and (1)(b), see section 1 of chapter 165, Session Laws of Colorado 2004. For the legislative declaration in HB 24-1472, see section 1 of chapter 325, Session Laws of Colorado 2024.

13-64-302.5. Exemplary damages - legislative declaration - limitations - distribution of damages collected. (1) The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that it is in the public interest to establish a consistent and uniformly applicable standard for the determination, amount, imposition, and distribution of exemplary monetary damages arising from civil actions and arbitration proceedings alleging professional negligence in the practice of medicine. It is the intent of the general assembly that any such exemplary damages serve the public purposes of deterring negligent acts and where appropriate provide a form of punishment that is in addition to the disciplinary and licensing sanctions available to the Colorado medical board. (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the exemplary damages provided for in this section and authorized to be imposed upon a health-care professional shall be the only such damages imposed as a result of the negligence claim. (3) In any civil action or arbitration proceeding alleging negligence against a health-care professional, exemplary damages may not be included in any initial claim for relief. A claim for such exemplary damages may be asserted by amendment to the pleadings only after the substantial completion of discovery and only after the plaintiff establishes prima facie proof of a triable issue. If the court or arbitrator allows such an amendment to the complaint under this subsection (3), it may also, in its discretion, permit additional discovery on the question of exemplary damages. (4) (a) In any civil action or arbitration proceeding in which compensatory damages are assessed against a health-care professional, the judge or arbitrator, in his discretion, and only if it is shown at the trial or proceeding that the action complained of was attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, may allow the trier of fact to impose reasonable exemplary damages, as provided in this subsection (4). The degree of proof shall be as provided in section 13-25-127 (2). (b) The standards for awarding and the amount of exemplary damages, if imposed upon such health-care professional, shall be as provided in sections 13-21-102 and 13-25-127 (2). (5) (a) No exemplary damages shall be imposed under subsection (4) of this section which were the result of the use of any drug or product approved for use by any state or federal regulatory agency and used within the approved standards therefor, or used in accordance with standards of prudent health-care professionals. (b) No exemplary damages shall be imposed under subsection (4) of this section which were the result of the use of any drug or product subject to the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (5) when the clinically justified use of such drug or product is beyond the regulatory approvals or standards therefor and is in accordance with standards of prudent health-care professionals, and when such use has been agreed to pursuant to the written informed consent of the recipient. (6) No exemplary damages shall be assessed against a health-care professional as a result of the acts of others unless he specifically directed the act to be done or ratified the same. (7) For the purposes of this section, unless the context otherwise requires, "health-care professional" has the same meaning set forth in section 13-64-202 (4).

Source: L. 90: Entire section added, p. 883, § 1, effective July 1. L. 91: (5) amended, p. 376, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2010: (1) amended, (HB 10-1260), ch. 403, p. 1985, § 71, effective July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Colorado Permanente Med. Grp., P.C. v. Evans, 926 P.2d 1218 (Colo. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Colorado Permanente Med. Grp., P.C. v. Evans, 926 P.2d 1218 (Colo. 1996). · cites it 57× “[5] As to the other two issues on which we granted certiorari, we affirm the court of appeals decision that the medical malpractice damages statute, section 13-64-302, 6A C.R.S. (1996 Supp.), limits recovery for noneconomic damages to $250,000 per patient; and, we reverse the…”
Preston v. Dupont, 35 P.3d 433 (Colo. 2001). · cites it 38× “(2001), which limits noneconomic damages in general, civil actions, and section 13-64-302, 5 C.R.S. (2001), the section of the HCAA that limits noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions.”
Garhart Ex Rel. Tinsman v. Columbia/HealthOne, L.L.C., 95 P.3d 571 (Colo. 2004). · cites it 34× “which makes it clear that when we talk about liability in the medical malpractice arena, we are always talking about C.R.S. 13-64-302. Concerning the Limitation on Noneconomic Damages for Certain Physical Injuries in Medical Malpractice Claims: Hearing on H.”
Chance Gresser, individually & as parent, Nat. guardian, next of friendand on behalf of his daughter, C.G., & Erin Gresser, individually & asparent, Nat. guardian, next of friend & on behalf of her daughter, C.G. v. Banner Health, d/b/a North Colorado Med. Ctr., 2023 COA 108 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 27× “§ 13-64-302(1)(b), C.R.S. 2023. The HCAA provides limited circumstances in which a trial court may lift the cap to award “the present value of additional past and future economic damages only.”
Scholz v. Metro. Pathologists, P.C., 851 P.2d 901 (Colo. 1993). · cites it 10× “Section 13-64-302, 6A C.R.S. (1992 Supp.), provides, in pertinent part, that: The total amount recoverable for all damages for a course of care for all defendants in any civil action for damages in tort brought against a health care professional .”
Pressey ex rel. Pressey v. Child.'s Hosp. Colorado, 2017 COA 28 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 13× “The HCAA Damages Cap and the Collateral Source Statute ¶7 The Hospital argues that the legislative purpose of the HCAA damages cap cannot be fulfilled if a trial court is precluded from considering the actual losses of a plaintiff based on the contract exception to the…”
Morris v. Goodwin, 185 P.3d 777 (Colo. 2008). · cites it 12× “(2007), does not allow a claimant to collect prejudgment interest on the portion of a jury verdict that exceeds the noneconomic damages cap imposed by section 13-64-302, C.R.S. (2007). See maj.”
Ochoa v. Vered, 186 P.3d 107 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 11× “Here, the parties agree that Ochoa's non-economic damages were properly reduced to $250,000 under section 13-64-302, C.R.S.2007. Ochoa is not seeking to recover prefil-ing interest in excess of the cap, but rather is seeking to recover slightly greater postfiling interest, which…”
Ochoa v. Vered, 212 P.3d 963 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “Vered contends the trial court erred in calculating postfiling, prejudgment interest on the total damages awarded by the jury, rather than on the final judgment after the noneconomic damage portion of that award was reduced to $250,000, the cap under section 13-64-302(1)(b) of…”
Alexander Rudnicki & Francis Rudnicki as parents, guardians, & nextfriends & Pamela Rudnicki, as parents, guardians, & next friends v. Peter Bianco, D.O., 2023 COA 103 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 31× “We conclude that the plain language of section 13-64-302 supports the award. 20 1.”
Wallbank v. Rothenberg, 140 P.3d 177 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “2005), which limits the judgment recoverable by a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to $1 million, but creates a limited exception, inter alia, for recovery of damages for future lost earnings. We interpret this statute de novo, but we do so to determine whether the…”
Dupont v. Preston, 9 P.3d 1193 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 8× “Here, however, defendant has not asserted the applicability of the damage cap contained in § 13-64-302 concerning the damages the jury awarded.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(1) — 8 cases
Preston v. Dupont, 35 P.3d 433 (Colo. 2001). “(2001), which limits noneconomic damages in general, civil actions, and section 13-64-302, 5 C.R.S. (2001), the section of the HCAA that limits noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions.”
Wallbank v. Rothenberg, 140 P.3d 177 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). “2005), which limits the judgment recoverable by a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to $1 million, but creates a limited exception, inter alia, for recovery of damages for future lost earnings. We interpret this statute de novo, but we do so to determine whether the…”
Wallbank v. Rothenberg, 74 P.3d 413 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
Chavez v. Parkview Episcopal Med. Ctr., 32 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
Dupont v. Preston, 9 P.3d 1193 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). “Here, however, defendant has not asserted the applicability of the damage cap contained in § 13-64-302 concerning the damages the jury awarded.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(1)(II)(A) — 1 case
Susan Ann Scholle v. Edward Ehrichs (Colo. Ct. App. 2022).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(1)(b) — 12 cases
Chance Gresser, individually & as parent, Nat. guardian, next of friendand on behalf of his daughter, C.G., & Erin Gresser, individually & asparent, Nat. guardian, next of friend & on behalf of her daughter, C.G. v. Banner Health, d/b/a North Colorado Med. Ctr., 2023 COA 108 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). “§ 13-64-302(1)(b), C.R.S. 2023. The HCAA provides limited circumstances in which a trial court may lift the cap to award “the present value of additional past and future economic damages only.”
Pressey ex rel. Pressey v. Child.'s Hosp. Colorado, 2017 COA 28 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). “The HCAA Damages Cap and the Collateral Source Statute ¶7 The Hospital argues that the legislative purpose of the HCAA damages cap cannot be fulfilled if a trial court is precluded from considering the actual losses of a plaintiff based on the contract exception to the…”
Alexander Rudnicki & Francis Rudnicki as parents, guardians, & nextfriends & Pamela Rudnicki, as parents, guardians, & next friends v. Peter Bianco, D.O., 2023 COA 103 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). “We conclude that the plain language of section 13-64-302 supports the award. 20 1.”
Morris v. Goodwin, 185 P.3d 777 (Colo. 2008). “(2007), does not allow a claimant to collect prejudgment interest on the portion of a jury verdict that exceeds the noneconomic damages cap imposed by section 13-64-302, C.R.S. (2007). See maj.”
Steedle v. Sereff, 167 P.3d 135 (Colo. 2007).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(1)(c) — 1 case
Steedle v. Sereff, 167 P.3d 135 (Colo. 2007).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(2) — 8 cases
Preston v. Dupont, 35 P.3d 433 (Colo. 2001). “(2001), which limits noneconomic damages in general, civil actions, and section 13-64-302, 5 C.R.S. (2001), the section of the HCAA that limits noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions.”
Ochoa v. Vered, 212 P.3d 963 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). “Vered contends the trial court erred in calculating postfiling, prejudgment interest on the total damages awarded by the jury, rather than on the final judgment after the noneconomic damage portion of that award was reduced to $250,000, the cap under section 13-64-302(1)(b) of…”
Morris v. Goodwin, 185 P.3d 777 (Colo. 2008). “(2007), does not allow a claimant to collect prejudgment interest on the portion of a jury verdict that exceeds the noneconomic damages cap imposed by section 13-64-302, C.R.S. (2007). See maj.”
Ochoa v. Vered, 186 P.3d 107 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “Here, the parties agree that Ochoa's non-economic damages were properly reduced to $250,000 under section 13-64-302, C.R.S.2007. Ochoa is not seeking to recover prefil-ing interest in excess of the cap, but rather is seeking to recover slightly greater postfiling interest, which…”
Dupont v. Preston, 9 P.3d 1193 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). “Here, however, defendant has not asserted the applicability of the damage cap contained in § 13-64-302 concerning the damages the jury awarded.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(l)(a)(II)(A) — 2 cases
Price v. Walgreen Co., 348 F. Supp. 2d 1212 (D. Colo. 2004).
Price v. Walgreen Co., 322 F. Supp. 2d 1179 (D. Colo. 2004).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-64-302(l)(b) — 2 cases
Garhart Ex Rel. Tinsman v. Columbia/HealthOne, L.L.C., 95 P.3d 571 (Colo. 2004). “which makes it clear that when we talk about liability in the medical malpractice arena, we are always talking about C.R.S. 13-64-302. Concerning the Limitation on Noneconomic Damages for Certain Physical Injuries in Medical Malpractice Claims: Hearing on H.”
Wallbank v. Rothenberg, 140 P.3d 177 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). “2005), which limits the judgment recoverable by a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to $1 million, but creates a limited exception, inter alia, for recovery of damages for future lost earnings. We interpret this statute de novo, but we do so to determine whether the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.