Pain & Suffering: Medical Malpractice vs. Ordinary Injury

By the FigureMyTax Editorial Team · How we calculate

Kentucky's constitutional protection doesn't carve out an exception for malpractice the way many states' statutory caps do — the ban applies identically to both categories.

One constitutional ban, no carve-out

Section 54 of the Kentucky Constitution prohibits the legislature from capping damages for injury to person or property generally — there's no built-in exception that would allow a malpractice-specific cap the way some states' statutory frameworks permit. Any such cap would require amending the constitution itself, the same high bar that applies to capping ordinary injury damages.

Repeated proposals, same obstacle

Proposed constitutional amendments over the years have specifically targeted expanding the legislature's power to limit damages, including in malpractice contexts. Each attempt still requires the same three-fifths legislative vote plus statewide referendum — and none has succeeded in actually changing the constitutional text.

Fault works the same way too

The same KRS 411.182 pure comparative fault rule applies uniformly across both claim types — no special fault standard exists for malpractice, and no fault bar applies to either.

Procedure is where malpractice differs

Identical damages and fault rules don't make malpractice claims simpler overall. Claims against a physician, surgeon, dentist, or hospital fall under a specific limitations provision within KRS 413.140(1)(e), generally requiring expert testimony establishing the applicable standard of care — a procedural burden ordinary injury claims don't carry.

This is general information, not legal advice. Medical malpractice claims involve procedural requirements beyond what's described here. Confirm how Kentucky's rules apply to your specific case with a licensed attorney.