The multiplier method: scaling off your damages
The multiplier method is the industry's default approach. It takes your economic damages — medical bills and lost wages — and multiplies that total by a factor generally between 1.5 and 5, chosen based on injury severity, recovery time, and whether any permanent impairment is involved.
The per diem method: valuing each day
The per diem (Latin for "per day") method works differently. It assigns a specific dollar value to a single day of pain and suffering and multiplies that rate by the total number of days of documented recovery, tying the value directly to time rather than to the size of your medical bills.
Why the accrual date matters more than the method here
For an ordinary Nevada injury case, neither method runs into a cap at all. Medical malpractice is different, and here the decisive factor usually isn't the valuation method — it's exactly when the claim accrued. Since a 2023 law took effect, Nevada's malpractice noneconomic cap has risen by a fixed $80,000 every January 1, reaching $590,000 for 2026 on its way to $750,000 by 2028. A claim that accrued a year apart can face a meaningfully different ceiling, regardless of which valuation method produced the underlying noneconomic estimate.
So pinning down the accrual date matters more than the method
Before investing effort in choosing between the multiplier and per diem methods for a Nevada malpractice claim, it's worth confirming the exact date the cause of action accrued, since that date — not the valuation method — determines which year's cap figure applies.
Neither is required by Nevada law
Both methods remain negotiating tools, not a formula Nevada courts are required to apply. A jury retains discretion to award whatever amount it finds appropriate for noneconomic damages — subject to whichever cap, if any, genuinely applies to the case.