Damage Caps in Arizona Injury Cases

Arizona is one of the few states where the amount of money you can recover after a crash is not capped. Not by the legislature, and not by the courts. In many states a jury can award full damages and a judge then trims the number down to a statutory ceiling. That does not happen here. If a drunk driver puts you in the hospital and a Maricopa County jury decides your losses are worth $4 million, the $4 million stands.

The reason is unusual, and it changes how an Arizona claim is valued from the start.

No cap is written into the state constitution

Arizona does not merely lack a damages cap. Its constitution forbids one, in two separate places.

Article 2, Section 31 says: "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."¹ Article 18, Section 6 adds that "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."²

Together those lines mean the Arizona Legislature cannot pass a bill capping what an injured person recovers, and cannot abolish the underlying right to sue. A statute that tried to would be struck down. So the caps you may have read about in other states, limits on pain-and-suffering awards, medical-malpractice ceilings, flat dollar maximums, do not exist in Arizona.

What the no-cap rule covers

The ban reaches every category of damages in an injury or wrongful death case.

Economic damages have no ceiling: medical bills, future care, lost wages, lost earning capacity. Non-economic damages have no ceiling either, and that is the piece most states have tried to limit. Pain, disfigurement, and the loss of the things you used to be able to do all go to the jury with no statutory cap.

Wrongful death claims work the same way. A.R.S. § 12-613 tells the jury to award "such damages as it deems fair and just with reference to the injury resulting from the death," and sets no dollar limit.³ Medical malpractice is not carved out. Arizona is one of the states where the legislature cannot cap a malpractice award, again because of Article 2, Section 31.

Punitive damages are uncapped, but hard to win

Punitive damages, the money meant to punish a defendant rather than pay you back, are also not capped in Arizona. There is no multiplier and no statutory maximum.

Winning them is another matter. In Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona v. Carman (2022), the Arizona Supreme Court restated the standard: punitive damages require proof of an "evil mind," meaning the defendant either intended to cause harm, acted out of spite or ill will, or consciously pursued a course of conduct while knowing it created a substantial risk of significant harm to others.⁴ The proof has to be clear and convincing, a tougher bar than the "more likely than not" standard used for ordinary damages, a rule the court set back in Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance Co., 150 Ariz. 326 (1986). Careless driving on its own rarely clears that bar. A drunk driver, a street racer, or a trucking company that brushed off a known safety risk is the kind of defendant a punitive claim is built around.

The two exceptions

There are two situations where the no-limit rule bends.

The first is narrow. In 2012 voters passed Proposition 114, the Crime Victims Protection Act, by roughly four to one.⁵ It amended both constitutional provisions so that a crime victim cannot be sued for damages by a person who was hurt while committing, attempting, or fleeing a felony. If you were injured in a crash while committing a felony, that can bar your claim against the victim. In an ordinary crash it never comes up.

The second comes up far more often: claims against the government. A.R.S. § 12-820.04 says "neither a public entity nor a public employee acting within the scope of his employment is liable for punitive or exemplary damages."⁶ So when the at-fault driver was a city bus, a state truck, or a marked patrol car, your compensatory damages stay uncapped, but punitive damages are off the table. Government claims also run on short deadlines that can end a case long before any of this matters. You must serve a written notice of claim within 180 days of the crash or the claim is barred, and you have just one year to file suit, well short of the usual window.⁷⁸ If a government vehicle was involved, pulling the crash report early and speaking with a lawyer quickly both matter.

Comparative fault reduces what you recover

The thing most likely to shrink a recovery is not a cap. It is your own share of the blame.

Arizona uses pure comparative negligence. Under A.R.S. § 12-2505, if you were partly at fault "the full damages shall be reduced in proportion to the relative degree of the claimant's fault," but your claim "is not barred."⁹ A jury that values your losses at $200,000 and finds you 30% at fault awards you $140,000. A plaintiff found 99% at fault can still collect 1%. The one carve-out: a person who intentionally, willfully, or wantonly caused their own injury gets no comparative-fault recovery at all.

There is also a deadline that can wipe out an uncapped claim completely. You generally have two years from the date of the crash to file suit under A.R.S. § 12-542.¹⁰ Miss it, and the size of your damages stops mattering.

What actually limits recovery in practice

No cap is not the same as guaranteed money. In most crashes the real ceiling is the at-fault driver's insurance and personal assets. Arizona's minimum liability limits are only $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury, plus $15,000 for property damage.¹¹ A driver carrying the minimum can cause far more harm than the policy will pay, and you cannot collect what someone does not have.

That is why uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage carries so much weight here. Insurers must offer UM and UIM coverage in writing at your liability limits, though you can reject it in writing (A.R.S. § 20-259.01).¹² When you have it, it steps in after the other driver's policy is exhausted. If your car lost market value in the wreck, that is a separate diminished value claim. And when the numbers are large, or a government or commercial defendant is in the picture, that is the point to find an attorney.

This article is general information, not legal advice.

Sources

Arizona Constitution, Article 2, Section 31. https://www.azleg.gov/const/2/31.htm
Arizona Constitution, Article 18, Section 6. https://www.azleg.gov/const/18/6.htm
A.R.S. § 12-613 (measure of damages in a wrongful death action). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00613.htm
Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, L.L.C. v. Carman, No. CV-20-0119-PR (Ariz. Aug. 23, 2022). https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Supreme/2022/CV200119PR.pdf
Arizona Proposition 114 (2012), Crime Victims Protection Act, approved Nov. 6, 2012 (Ballotpedia). https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Crime_Victims_Protection_Act_Amendment,_Proposition_114_(2012)
A.R.S. § 12-820.04 (punitive or exemplary damages against public entities and employees). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00820-04.htm
A.R.S. § 12-821.01 (notice of claim against a public entity, 180 days). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00821-01.htm
A.R.S. § 12-821 (one-year limitation for actions against public entities). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00821.htm
A.R.S. § 12-2505 (comparative negligence). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/02505.htm
A.R.S. § 12-542 (two-year statute of limitations for injury and property damage). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00542.htm
A.R.S. § 28-4009 (minimum motor vehicle liability coverage). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/04009.htm
A.R.S. § 20-259.01 (uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage offer). https://www.azleg.gov/ars/20/00259-01.htm

Damage Caps in Injury Cases in Arizona