Higgins v. Providence Health System
Defendant and appellant Providence Health System—Southern California (Providence) challenges a judgment entered following a jury trial in favor of plaintiffs and respondents Dona Higgins, the deceased patient, and her husband, Gary Higgins. The sole issue on appeal is whether the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 (MICRA) $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages applies.
We conclude that MICRA would cap plaintiffs’ damages at $250,000 unless the jury found that Providence acted with recklessness. But the special verdict form was problematic in that it instructed the jury to skip the question asking whether Providence acted with recklessness, yet later asked the jury whether Providence’s recklessness was a substantial factor in causing Mrs. Higgins’s death. Because of these flaws in the special verdict, the judgment is reversed and the matter is remanded for a new trial.
Comments on Higgins v. Providence Health System