Table of Contents
Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained in one sentence: Arizona is one of the few states where lawmakers cannot limit how much money an injured person may recover. That rule matters if a defective drug, medical device, or product hurt you. In most states, a law caps some damages, often pain and suffering. Arizona is different.
Its constitution blocks those limits outright. As a result, a jury decides the full value of your harm. This guide gives the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained in plain English. It covers the two key provisions, the court cases that enforce them, and what they mean for mass tort claims. Having the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained up front helps you see why where you file can matter so much.
Arizona Constitutional Ban Damage Caps Explained: The Two Key Provisions
Two sections of the Arizona Constitution create the ban. Both date back to statehood in 1912. The first is Article 2, Section 31. It 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.”
The second is Article 18, Section 6. It says the right to sue for injuries “shall never be abrogated.” It also says the amount recovered “shall not be subject to any statutory limitation.” In simple terms, “abrogated” means abolished. So the legislature cannot take away your right to sue. It also cannot set a dollar ceiling on what you win.
Taken together, these sections form the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained by courts for more than a century. They protect injured people and the families of those who die. However, the ban does not stop every rule about lawsuits. Lawmakers can still set filing deadlines and procedures. They simply cannot limit the amount of damages or wipe out the claim itself.
How Arizona Courts Enforce the Ban
Arizona courts have struck down several laws that went too far. For example, in Kenyon v. Hammer (1984), the Arizona Supreme Court threw out a medical malpractice time limit. The court said it unfairly restricted injured patients. In Hazine v. Montgomery Elevator Co. (1993), the court struck down a 12-year product liability statute of repose. That law would have barred claims against older products, no matter when the injury happened.
Voters have also defended the ban. In 1990, Proposition 105 would have allowed limits on damages. Voters defeated it. In 1994, Proposition 103 would have let the legislature cap awards. Voters rejected that measure too. Later legislative proposals in 2010 and 2011 tried to repeal the provisions. None became law. Typically, any change would require a statewide vote to amend the constitution.
The table below shows how Arizona compares with states that do cap damages. It puts the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained side by side with other approaches.
| State | Cap on Non-Economic Damages? | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Arizona | No cap allowed | Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 31; art. 18, § 6 |
| Kentucky | No cap allowed | Ky. Const. § 54 |
| Pennsylvania | No cap allowed (most cases) | Pa. Const. art. III, § 18 |
| Wyoming | No cap allowed | Wyo. Const. art. 10, § 4 |
| California | Yes, medical malpractice | MICRA (raised by 2022 law) |
| Texas | Yes, medical malpractice | Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.301 |
As a result, Arizona juries can award full economic damages, such as medical bills and lost wages. They can also award full non-economic damages, such as pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life. Punitive damages are also uncapped. However, a plaintiff must prove the defendant acted with an “evil mind,” under Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance Co. (1986). That standard requires clear and convincing evidence.
What the Ban Means for Mass Tort Claims
Mass torts involve many people hurt by the same product. Examples include defective hip implants, contaminated drugs, and harmful chemicals. Many of these cases are grouped in federal multidistrict litigation, or MDL. Even so, state law usually decides what damages are available. That is why the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained here can affect real dollar outcomes.
For example, an Arizona resident injured by a defective device may have a claim governed by Arizona law. If so, no statute limits the pain-and-suffering award. In a capped state, the same injury might be limited by a set dollar figure. In most cases, settlement offers reflect what a jury could award. Therefore, uncapped damages can raise the value of Arizona claims in global settlements.
However, other Arizona rules still shape your recovery. Arizona uses pure comparative fault under A.R.S. § 12-2505. That means your award is reduced by your share of blame. For example, if you are 20% at fault, you recover 80%. Arizona also largely abolished joint and several liability under A.R.S. § 12-2506. Typically, each defendant pays only its own share of fault. The Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained in this article does not override those rules.
Workers’ compensation is a separate exception. Article 18, Section 8 allows a no-fault system for job injuries. If you were hurt at work, benefits may be your main remedy against your employer. You may still have a product claim against a third-party manufacturer.
Steps to Protect Your Rights in Arizona
Uncapped damages mean little if you miss a deadline. The ban does not stop time limits. Arizona’s general personal injury deadline is two years under A.R.S. § 12-542. Wrongful death claims, brought under A.R.S. § 12-611, also typically have a two-year limit. Claims against public entities are much tighter. You must file a notice of claim within 180 days under A.R.S. § 12-821.01. You must sue within one year.
📨 Get Free Mass Tort Guides Alerts
Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime
Here are practical steps to take now:
- Write down when you first learned of your injury and its possible cause.
- Keep the product, packaging, and any lot or serial numbers.
- Gather medical records, bills, and pharmacy receipts.
- Track lost wages and out-of-pocket costs.
- Keep a journal of pain, limits, and daily struggles. This supports non-economic damages.
- Check FDA recall notices and MDL status for your product.
Medical malpractice claims have extra steps. Under A.R.S. § 12-2603, you must certify whether expert testimony is needed. Typically, a preliminary expert opinion affidavit follows. Missing this step can get a case dismissed. As a result, early review of your claim is important. Understanding the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained here helps you value your claim, but procedure still decides whether you get paid.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Arizona have a cap on pain and suffering damages?
No. Article 2, Section 31 bars any law limiting damages for death or injury. As a result, juries decide pain-and-suffering awards without a statutory ceiling. That is the core of the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained in this guide.
Are there caps on medical malpractice awards in Arizona?
No. Unlike California or Texas, Arizona cannot cap malpractice damages. However, patients must follow strict procedures, such as expert affidavit rules. Typically, they must also file within two years.
Could Arizona ever adopt damage caps?
Only by amending the constitution through a statewide vote. Voters rejected cap measures in 1990 and 1994. In most cases, later repeal efforts died in the legislature. So for now, the Arizona constitutional ban damage caps explained here remains firmly in place.
Are punitive damages capped in Arizona?
No. Punitive damages are uncapped. However, you must prove the defendant acted with an “evil mind.” That requires clear and convincing evidence, a higher bar than most civil claims.
Check If You Qualify
You may be eligible for compensation from an active lawsuit and not even know it. Use our free tools to find out.
Official Sources & Resources
For verified mass tort and legal information:
- JPML (Case Data): jpml.uscourts.gov
- U.S. Department of Justice: justice.gov
- Cornell Law Institute: law.cornell.edu
- NCSL (State Laws): ncsl.org
- FDA Recalls & Safety: fda.gov
Content last reviewed October 2026. If you notice any outdated information, please contact us.
Related Guides
- Complete Mass Tort Guide
- All Active MDL Cases
- State Tort Reform Laws
- Eligibility Quiz Tool
- Damage Cap Lookup Tool
Attorney Advertising. The information on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by accessing or using this content. Every case is unique, and results depend on the specific facts and circumstances involved. Past settlement amounts and case outcomes do not guarantee similar results in your case. If you believe you have a legal claim, you should consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction who can evaluate your specific situation.