Arizona maintains no statutory caps on medical malpractice damages. This framework originates from explicit constitutional protections adopted at statehood that prohibit any law limiting damage recovery for injury or death.
These protections, outlined in Articles 2 and 18 of the Arizona Constitution, prevent the legislature from restricting jury-awarded damages and preserve plaintiffs' full recovery rights.
This article reviews Arizona’s constitutional framework, current damage limitations, key court precedents, and procedural rules governing medical malpractice litigation in 2025.
Legal Medical Malpractice Damage Framework in Arizona
Arizona’s medical malpractice damage framework originates from constitutional provisions adopted at statehood that prohibit legislative limits on damage recovery. The framework establishes constitutional protection for plaintiffs’ rights to full compensation in both economic and non-economic damages.
- Article 2 § 31: “No law shall be enacted in this state limiting the amount of damages to be recovered for causing the death or injury of any person.”
- Article 18 § 6: “The right of action to recover damages for injuries shall never be abrogated, and the amount recovered shall not be subject to any statutory limitation.”
These dual constitutional protections prevent the legislature from enacting laws that restrict recovery in medical malpractice cases. They guarantee that the amount of damages remains within the exclusive authority of juries and the courts rather than statutory caps.
Legislative Amendment Requirements
Because the prohibitions are constitutional, any change to permit damage caps would require a formal amendment to the Arizona Constitution. This process demands either:
- Two-thirds approval in both chambers of the legislature, followed by voter ratification, or
- Direct initiative by Arizona voters proposing an amendment.
No constitutional amendments or legislative proposals addressing medical malpractice damage limitations have been introduced or enacted as of November 2025.
2025 Arizona Medical Malpractice: No Statutory Damage Caps
Arizona imposes no statutory limitations on compensatory damages in medical malpractice actions. This framework is constitutionally protected under Article 2, Section 31 of the Arizona Constitution, which prohibits any law limiting recovery for injury or death.
Unlike most states, Arizona allows full recovery for both economic and non-economic losses, and there is no general statutory cap on punitive damages. Punitive awards are barred against public entities (A.R.S. § 12-820.04), but otherwise governed by constitutional due-process limits rather than fixed amounts.
Current Damage Structure:
- Economic Damages: Uncapped recovery (grounded in Ariz. Const. Art. 2 §31 and Art. 18 §6).
- Non-Economic Damages: Unlimited recovery for pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of consortium, and other non-economic damages, constitutionally protected from legislative caps.
- Punitive Damages: No general statutory cap in Arizona; punitive awards against public entities are barred (A.R.S. § 12-820.04).
- Wrongful Death Damages: No statutory limits apply to wrongful death claims. Both economic and non-economic damages remain fully protected by Articles 2 and 18 of the Arizona Constitution.
Recent Developments & Pending Legislation
As of November 2025, Arizona’s medical malpractice damage framework remains unchanged. No legislation introducing damage caps or modifying existing limitations was proposed during the 2024 or 2025 legislative sessions.
The most significant recent development was judicial. On September 12, 2025, the Arizona Supreme Court in Roebuck v. Mayo Clinic struck down A.R.S. § 12-516(A) under Article 18, Section 6, holding that heightened negligence standards during public health emergencies unconstitutionally restricted ordinary negligence claims.
Given the constitutional framework and absence of active legislative proposals, prospects for any future cap legislation remain minimal. Any attempt to establish malpractice damage limits would require a constitutional amendment—either through two-thirds legislative approval or direct voter initiative.
Key Arizona Medical Malpractice Court Precedents
Arizona’s medical malpractice framework is defined by Supreme Court rulings that consistently uphold the constitutional ban on damage caps.
Baker v. University Physicians Healthcare (2013) — Constitutional Strike-Down
In Baker v. University Physicians Healthcare, the Arizona Supreme Court established controlling precedent prohibiting statutory damage caps. The Court applied a two-part constitutional test: first, whether the right to recover full damages existed at common law in 1912, and second, whether statutory caps abrogate rather than merely regulate this right.
The Court concluded that damage caps unconstitutionally eliminate the right to full recovery protected under Article 18, Section 6. Baker reshaped Arizona’s medical malpractice framework and remains a binding precedent statewide.
Francisco v. Affiliated Urologists (2024) — Reaffirmation of Constitutional Protections
In Francisco v. Affiliated Urologists, the Arizona Supreme Court reaffirmed and extended Baker's holding. The Court emphasized the ongoing constitutional prohibition against caps on non-economic damages and reinforced Arizona's anti-abrogation framework as current law.
Francisco confirmed that Baker’s prohibition remains controlling precedent and reaffirmed that statutory attempts to limit recovery violate Article 18, Section 6. The decision strengthened the constitutional foundation against damage caps, ensuring Arizona’s anti-abrogation protections remain fully enforceable in modern malpractice litigation.
Roebuck v. Mayo Clinic (2025) — Expansion of Constitutional Protection
In Roebuck v. Mayo Clinic (2025), the Arizona Supreme Court struck down A.R.S. § 12-516(A) as unconstitutional under Article 18, Section 6. The Court held that requiring clear and convincing evidence of gross negligence during public health emergencies effectively abrogated the right to pursue ordinary negligence claims.
These rulings collectively reinforce Arizona’s position as one of the few jurisdictions providing unlimited compensatory recovery in medical malpractice cases.
Procedural Rules for Filing Medical Malpractice Claims in Arizona
Arizona medical malpractice actions must meet specific procedural requirements governing expert affidavits, filing deadlines, and discovery disclosures. These procedures ensure early case validation and efficient evidence exchange.
Statute of Limitations:
- A.R.S. § 12-542: Two years from the date of injury or discovery, whichever occurs first.
- Tolling applies for minors, fraudulent concealment, defendant absence, or related criminal proceedings.
Expert Affidavit Requirement:
- A.R.S. § 12-2603: Plaintiffs must file an affidavit within 60 days of the complaint or nonparty designation.
- The affidavit must identify the expert’s credentials, outline the applicable standard of care, and provide a factual basis for the alleged breach and resulting harm.
- Noncompliance results in dismissal without prejudice.
Expert Qualifications:
- A.R.S. § 12-2604: Experts must actively practice or teach in the same specialty within one year of the alleged incident.
- Courts may exclude experts lacking direct, recent experience in the defendant’s field.
Discovery and Record Exchange:
- Rule 26.3, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure: Within 5 days after all served defendants have answered or moved (per Rule 16 scheduling), plaintiff serves available medical records; defendants reciprocate within 10 days.
- The rule accelerates case assessment and reduces pretrial delays.
Regulatory Reporting:
- A.R.S. § 12-570: Attorneys must notify relevant licensing boards within 30 days of settlement or judgment.
- Noncompliance may result in a $500 civil penalty.
Pre-Suit Notice: None for private providers. For claims against public entities or employees, a Notice of Claim is required within 180 days (A.R.S. § 12-821.01).
Arizona’s procedural framework emphasizes timely expert certification and early exchange of records, supporting efficient case preparation within a system that maintains unrestricted compensatory recovery.
Arizona Medical Malpractice Practice Framework
Arizona’s malpractice system preserves full recovery rights under constitutional protection. With no statutory damage caps and limited procedural barriers, plaintiffs retain access to unrestricted economic and non-economic recovery. The state’s procedural rules focus on early expert review and expedited record exchange, ensuring efficient case development while maintaining constitutional safeguards.
Accurate documentation and timely record analysis remain essential for defensible case preparation. AI-powered tools such as automated medical record retrieval and chronology generation streamline review and strengthen litigation readiness.
To learn more about automated support for Arizona medical malpractice and personal injury cases, request a demo.
.webp)
.webp)
