Free Case Evaluation
FILL OUT THE FORM BELOW
TO REQUEST YOUR CASE REVIEW
MICRA Caps of $470,000 for Injury and $650,000 for Death in 2026
California's limit on pain and suffering in a medical malpractice case is $470,000 for an injury and $650,000 for a death in 2026.
The figures come from Civil Code § 3333.2 as rewritten by AB 35, and they rise every January 1 until 2033.
In 2027 they become $510,000 and $700,000.
A case can carry a second cap, and occasionally a third, when different categories of defendant share the blame.
Medical bills, lost earnings, and the cost of future care are not capped at all.
If a doctor's or hospital's error harmed you or someone you love, call (888) 713-6653 with your questions.
MICRA in 2026 at a Glance
- $470,000 for an injury and $650,000 for a death, per category of defendant, in 2026
- Increases of $40,000 and $50,000 every January 1 until $750,000 and $1,000,000 in 2033, then 2 percent a year
- Separate caps for health care providers and health care institutions, and a narrow third cap for an unaffiliated facility's separate negligence
- Economic damages, including medical bills, lost earnings, and future care, are uncapped
- Figures reviewed October 2026; this page is updated each January
The MICRA Cap Schedule From 2023 to 2033 Under AB 35
For 47 years, California capped malpractice pain and suffering at $250,000, a number set in 1975 and never adjusted. AB 35, signed in 2022 after a deal that kept a ballot measure off the November ballot, replaced it with two rising caps that took effect on January 1, 2023.[1]
"In 2026, California's MICRA cap is $470,000 for an injury and $650,000 for a death."
| Year | Injury (non-death) cap | Wrongful death cap |
|---|---|---|
| 2023 | $350,000 | $500,000 |
| 2024 | $390,000 | $550,000 |
| 2025 | $430,000 | $600,000 |
| 2026 | $470,000 | $650,000 |
| 2027 | $510,000 | $700,000 |
| 2028 | $550,000 | $750,000 |
| 2029 | $590,000 | $800,000 |
| 2030 | $630,000 | $850,000 |
| 2031 | $670,000 | $900,000 |
| 2032 | $710,000 | $950,000 |
| 2033 | $750,000 | $1,000,000 |
| 2034 onward | Adjusted by 2 percent each January 1 | |
The figure that applies is the one in effect when the case ends in a judgment, an arbitration award, or a settlement, for any case filed or arbitration demanded on or after January 1, 2023. A case filed in 2024 that settles in 2027 takes the 2027 cap, so the year a case resolves can change its value. Cases filed before 2023 stay under the old $250,000 limit.
Many websites still quote the old $250,000 figure or the 2023 number, so a family reading an outdated page can wrongly conclude a serious malpractice case is not worth bringing. Outside malpractice, California caps no pain-and-suffering damages at all, as our overview of California injury law explains.
How the Three Separate MICRA Caps Can Stack in One Case
The old law had one cap for the whole case, no matter how many doctors and hospitals were involved. AB 35 created three separate limits that may apply, and no single defendant can be counted in more than one of them.[2]
- Health care providers. Doctors, nurses, and other individual licensed providers share one cap, collectively, however many of them are sued.
- Health care institutions. Hospitals and other facilities share a second cap, collectively.
- Unaffiliated defendants. A third cap reaches a provider or institution unaffiliated with the others whose separate, independent negligence happened at an unaffiliated facility or during transport to one.
A missed diagnosis involving an emergency physician and the hospital where it happened can carry two caps in 2026, $470,000 for the doctors and $470,000 for the hospital. The third cap is narrow. It fits a case where the patient was harmed again after a transfer, by an ambulance crew or at a second, unrelated facility. In a 2026 injury case all three would total $1,410,000, which is a ceiling rather than a typical figure.
Who employed whom, which facility the care happened in, and whether a transfer was involved decide how many caps are available, so those questions belong at the start of the investigation.
Medical Bills, Lost Earnings, and Future Care Stay Uncapped Under MICRA
MICRA limits only non-economic damages: pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, and similar losses. Everything with a dollar figure attached stays recoverable in full.
- Past and future medical care, including surgeries, rehabilitation, attendant care, and equipment
- Lost earnings and lost earning capacity for the years the injury takes away from work
- Home and vehicle modifications for a lasting disability
- Household services the injured person can no longer perform
In a catastrophic case, a birth injury, a brain injury, a paralyzing surgical error, the economic damages often run many times the cap, and they are proven through a life care plan, an economist, and the treating physicians. Two older MICRA rules still shape them. A defendant may tell the jury about insurance benefits you received under Civil Code § 3333.1, and either side can ask that future damages above a set amount be paid over time under Code of Civil Procedure § 667.7 rather than in a lump sum.
Some nursing home claims may fall outside MICRA entirely. In Holland v. Silverscreen Healthcare (2025), the California Supreme Court separated a skilled nursing facility's role as a health care provider from its role as a custodian of daily care, and a neglect claim aimed at the custodial side may not be subject to the cap.
The cap shapes the pain-and-suffering portion, and the life care plan decides most of what a serious malpractice case is worth.
Why the MICRA Cap Hits Hardest When the Economic Loss Is Small
A California malpractice case is worth its full economic losses plus non-economic damages up to the cap for each category of defendant that shares responsibility.
The cap falls hardest where the economic loss is small. When the person harmed was a child, a retiree, or someone not earning a wage, the non-economic damages are most of the case, and the death cap of $650,000 in 2026 sets much of its value. When the person harmed has decades of lost earnings and lifetime care ahead, the cap matters far less.
Where the care happened matters too. Kaiser members bring malpractice claims in private arbitration, where MICRA applies the same way it does in court, as our page on Kaiser Permanente malpractice arbitration explains. A claim against a county hospital adds a six-month government claim deadline, though University of California medical centers are exempt from that requirement.
AB 35 also changed the fee side. Business and Professions Code § 6146 limits a lawyer's contingency fee in a malpractice case to 25 percent when a settlement and release are signed before any lawsuit or arbitration demand is filed, and 33 percent after, both figured on the recovery net of costs. A higher fee is possible only if the case is tried or arbitrated and the lawyer shows good cause by motion. The details are on our page about California contingency fee rules.[3]
The One-Year Discovery Clock and the 90-Day Notice Under § 364
A California malpractice lawsuit must be filed within one year after the patient discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, the injury, and no later than three years after the injury itself, under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5.[4] The three-year limit is extended for fraud, intentional concealment, or an object left inside the body.
Before filing, the patient must give the provider at least 90 days' notice of the intent to sue under § 364. If that notice is served within the last 90 days of the limitations period, the deadline is tolled for 90 days, adding 90 days to it, which is why the notice is often timed carefully. The patient's broader options are covered on our page about a California malpractice claim from start to finish.
A child's claim runs three years from the date of the wrongful act, and a child injured before age six has until the eighth birthday if that is later. A claim against a county hospital also needs a written government claim, and our page on filing within six months against a county hospital or agency explains how.
An apology from a doctor or hospital does not prove the case, and it cannot be used against them either. Under Health and Safety Code § 104340, added by AB 35, statements of sympathy or regret made before a lawsuit or arbitration demand, including statements accepting fault, are confidential and inadmissible. The records are what prove the case.
The one-year discovery clock often starts when someone says the outcome was not expected, so that conversation is the date to write down.