Banner Health v. Gresser.

No. 23SC959. Medical Malpractice Damages—HCAA—Statutory Damages Cap—Grossly and Manifestly Excessive Damages—Jury’s Common Law Authority to Determine Damages—Remittitur—Statutory Interpretation.

October 20, 2025

In this medical malpractice case, the supreme court interpreted the Health Care Availability Act’s (HCAA) damages cap and considered how a trial court should determine the appropriate amount of damages to award if the court determines that it is appropriate to exceed the cap under the exception provided by the legislature in CRS § 13-64-302(1)(b) (subsection 302(1)(b)). The court held that once a trial court has determined that the plaintiff has established good cause to exceed the HCAA’s damages cap and that imposing the cap would be unfair, the court’s subsequent determination as to the proper amount of damages is governed by common law; meaning, under subsection 302(1)(b)’s exception, the jury retains its authority to determine the amount of damages, subject only to the court’s remittitur authority and its authority to review the award for the sufficiency of the evidence. In this case, therefore, the court affirmed the trial court’s entry of judgment for the full amount of the jury award, plus pre- and post-filing interest. It also affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals.