Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.610 (2026)

Liability insurance for tort claims may be purchased by whom

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

537.610. Liability insurance for tort claims may be purchased by whom — limitation on waiver of immunity — maximum amount payable for claims out of single occurrence — exception — apportionment of settlements — inflation — penalties. — 1. The commissioner of administration, through the purchasing division, and the governing body of each political subdivision of this state, notwithstanding any other provision of law, may purchase liability insurance for tort claims, made against the state or the political subdivision, but the maximum amount of such coverage shall not exceed two million dollars for all claims arising out of a single occurrence and shall not exceed three hundred thousand dollars for any one person in a single accident or occurrence, except for those claims governed by the provisions of the Missouri workers' compensation law, chapter 287, and no amount in excess of the above limits shall be awarded or settled upon. Sovereign immunity for the state of Missouri and its political subdivisions is waived only to the maximum amount of and only for the purposes covered by such policy of insurance purchased pursuant to the provisions of this section and in such amount and for such purposes provided in any self-insurance plan duly adopted by the governing body of any political subdivision of the state.

2. The liability of the state and its public entities on claims within the scope of sections 537.600 to 537.650, shall not exceed two million dollars for all claims arising out of a single accident or occurrence and shall not exceed three hundred thousand dollars for any one person in a single accident or occurrence, except for those claims governed by the provisions of the Missouri workers' compensation law, chapter 287.

3. No award for damages on any claim against a public entity within the scope of sections 537.600 to 537.650, shall include punitive or exemplary damages.

4. If the amount awarded to or settled upon multiple claimants exceeds two million dollars, any party may apply to any circuit court to apportion to each claimant his proper share of the total amount limited by subsection 1 of this section. The share apportioned each claimant shall be in the proportion that the ratio of the award or settlement made to him bears to the aggregate awards and settlements for all claims arising out of the accident or occurrence, but the share shall not exceed three hundred thousand dollars.

5. The limitation on awards for liability provided for in this section shall be increased or decreased on an annual basis effective January first of each year in accordance with the Implicit Price Deflator for Personal Consumption Expenditures as published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the United States Department of Commerce. The current value of the limitation shall be calculated by the director of the department of commerce and insurance, who shall furnish that value to the secretary of state, who shall publish such value in the Missouri Register as soon after each January first as practicable, but it shall otherwise be exempt from the provisions of section 536.021.

6. Any claim filed against any public entity under this section shall be subject to the penalties provided by supreme court rule 55.03, or any successor rule.

--------

(L. 1978 H.B. 1650 § 2, A.L. 1989 H.B. 161, A.L. 1999 S.B. 295 & 46, A.L. 2009 H.B. 481)

CROSS REFERENCE:

Liability of state and public entities, increases to be effective on certain causes of actions, when, 537.615

(2000) Statutory cap does not apply to postjudgment interest on damage awards against the State. Benoit v. Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission, 33 S.W.3d 663 (Mo.App.S.D.).

(2020) Section’s per individual, per-occurrence limitation of liability was not waived by section 70.429 requirement for bi-state development transit system to comply with federal safety regulations establishing a minimum level of financial responsibility. Moore v. Bi-State Development Agency, 609 S.W.3d 698 (Mo.banc).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 141 cases (23 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Bartley v. Special Sch. Dist. of St. Louis Cnty., 649 S.W.2d 864 (Mo. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bartley v. Special Sch. Dist. of St. Louis Cnty., 649 S.W.2d 864 (Mo. 1983). · cites it 42× “pinion written by Judge Crist are plain enough: Appellants (plaintiffs) filed suit against respondent (defendant school) for damages allegedly resulting from injuries sustained by school bus riding students, Arlene Renee Bartley and Wendy Owens, as a result of negligence of the…”

Fisher v. State High. Com'n of Mo., 948 S.W.2d 607 (Mo. 1997). · cites it 36× “On both claims, the trial court limited judgment to a total of $100,000 pursuant to section 537.610. [1] Because the validity of a statute is at issue, this Court has jurisdiction.”

Richardson v. State High. & Transp. Comm'n, 863 S.W.2d 876 (Mo. 1993). · cites it 16× “On the claims of Jennifer and Greg, judgment was limited to a total of $100,000 under § 537.610 RSMo Supp.1989. Because the validity of a statute is at issue, this Court has jurisdiction.”

The Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist. v. The City of Bellefontaine Neighbors, Sherrell Constr., Inc., 476 S.W.3d 913 (Mo. 2016). · cites it 6× “600 unless the political entity purchased insurance under section 537.610 was rendered moot by the amendment of section 537.”

Newsome v. Kansas City, Missouri Sch. Dist., 520 S.W.3d 769 (Mo. 2017). · cites it 7× “Motion for Remittitur In Points V and VI, the District argues the circuit court erred in overruling its motion for remittitur because the judgment exceeds the statutory maximum that may be awarded against a school district for a tort claim pursuant to § 537.”

Gregg v. City of Kansas City, 272 S.W.3d 353 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 12× “Pursuant to section 537.610, “when a public entity purchases liability insurance for tort claims, sovereign immunity is waived to the extent of and for the specific purposes of the insurance purchased.”

State Ex Rel. Bd. of Trs. of North Kansas City Mem'l Hosp. v. Russell, 843 S.W.2d 353 (Mo. 1992). · cites it 12× “Even when public entities have full sovereign immunity, they may waive that immunity through the purchase of insurance, as provided in section 537.610. Similarly, municipalities are specifically granted the power to purchase liability insurance by section 71.”

Klotz v. St. Anthony's Med. Ctr., 311 S.W.3d 752 (Mo. 2010). · cites it 6× “2d 504, 505 (1940), or suits for damages against the state as sovereign, section 537.610, RSMo Supp.2009; see State ex rel.”

Schumann v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 912 S.W.2d 548 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 16× “The trial court entered judgment in favor of Schumann for $133,700 (70% of $191,000), but subsequently amended the judgment to the sum of $100,000 to reflect the statutory cap on damages against governmental administrative agencies pursuant to § 537.610. 1 On June 6, 1990, at…”

Kunzie v. City of Olivette, 184 S.W.3d 570 (Mo. 2006). · cites it 8× “If the city maintains insurance that covers these types of claims, then it will have waived its immunity under section 537.610 for the specific purpose of and to the extent of its insurance coverage.”

Benoit v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 33 S.W.3d 663 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 12× “They maintain the trial court erred in failing to attach postjudgment interest to the jury award based upon a misapplication of the damage cap established by § 537.610. Plaintiffs contend that § 537.”

Langley v. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 73 S.W.3d 808 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 9× “610 RSMo to waive [the Curators’] sovereign immunity for claims as to which such insurance (and its self-insurance plan) provided coverage.”

Show all 141 citing cases →

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.610(1) — 2 cases

Bartley v. Special Sch. Dist. of St. Louis Cnty., 649 S.W.2d 864 (Mo. 1983). “pinion written by Judge Crist are plain enough: Appellants (plaintiffs) filed suit against respondent (defendant school) for damages allegedly resulting from injuries sustained by school bus riding students, Arlene Renee Bartley and Wendy Owens, as a result of negligence of the…”

McNealy (E.D. Mo. 2025).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.610(1)(2003) — 1 case

Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co v. Hatfield, 122 S.W.3d 36 (Ky. 2003).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.610(2) — 2 cases

Dangerfield v. City of Kansas City, 108 S.W.3d 769 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.610(4) — 1 case

McConnell v. St. Louis Cnty., 655 S.W.2d 654 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983).

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.