WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 1011

Relating to: recovery of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Brienne Brown and 7 co-sponsors

The bill proposes noneconomic damages caps in Wisconsin medical malpractice cases, defining limits on pain-and-suffering recovery and how they apply across claims and defendants.

Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 1011

Summary of Assembly Bill 1011 (Wisconsin) – 2025 Session

Note: The available briefing materials for AB 1011 indicate the bill concerns the recovery of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases. The following summary synthesizes the bill’s stated purpose, key provisions, anticipated impact, and procedural timeline based on the bill’s title, sponsor information, and standard statutory interpretation. If additional text becomes available (e.g., the full bill language), the details can be refined accordingly.

1) Purpose and Intent

  • The bill Relates to the recovery of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases.
  • Objective: Clarify, adjust, or constrain noneconomic damages (such as pain and suffering) recoverable in medical malpractice lawsuits within Wisconsin.
  • Intended outcome: Provide a framework for evaluating noneconomic damages in medical negligence claims, potentially affecting caps, methodologies, or eligibility.

2) Key Provisions and Changes (Conceptual)

Given the title and context, the bill is likely to address one or more of the following common themes in medical malpractice noneconomic damages reform. Note: specific textual provisions should be consulted in the final bill language for exact mechanics.

  • Noneconomic Damages Cap:
    • Establish or modify a cap on noneconomic damages recoverable in medical malpractice actions (e.g., a fixed dollar amount or indexed amount).
    • Determine whether the cap applies per claim, per defendant, or per incident, and whether multipliers apply in certain circumstances.
  • Eligibility and Exceptions:
    • Define which medical malpractice claims are subject to noneconomic damages limits (e.g., physicians, hospitals, certain facilities).
    • Create exemptions (e.g., for gross negligence, intentional misconduct, or certain categories of claims such as wrongful death or catastrophic injury).
  • Adjustment Mechanisms:
    • Provide for annual adjustments to caps based on inflation or other metrics.
    • Establish procedures for indexation to ensure caps maintain purchasing power over time.
  • Comparative Damages Rules:
    • Address how noneconomic damages interact with economic damages and total damages recovery.
    • Clarify whether noneconomic damages are limited in settlement negotiations or require court validation.
  • Litigation and Verification Procedures:
    • Specify admissibility and methods for proving noneconomic damages (e.g., standard of proof, expert testimony requirements).
    • Establish procedural timelines for filing, discovery related to noneconomic damages, and caps enforcement.
  • Remedies and Appeals:
    • Define enforcement mechanisms for caps and potential limits on post-judgment adjustments.
    • Outline avenues for appeal or judicial review of damages determinations.

3) Who or What Would Be Affected

  • Medical malpractice defendants: Physicians, hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare providers implicated in malpractice claims.
  • Plaintiffs: Individuals who sue for medical negligence and seek noneconomic damages for pain and suffering, emotional distress, or loss of enjoyment of life.
  • Insurance and health care liability insurers: Potential impact on reserve requirements, premium calculations, and settlement strategies.
  • Legal practitioners: Attorneys representing plaintiffs or defendants in medical malpractice cases; potential shifts in strategy related to noneconomic damages.
  • Medical institutions and facilities: May experience changes in liability risk exposure and cost structures.

4) Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Introduction: February 6, 2026 (Introduced by Rep. Sinicki et al.).
  • Initial Referral: Referred to the Committee on Health, Aging and Long-Term Care.
  • Sponsorship: Co-sponsored by eight legislators (names listed in the sponsor section).
  • Legislative History: The action history notes a failed passage attempt on a Senate-related joint resolution (SJR 1) on March 23, 2026, indicating the bill faced procedural hurdles or lack of final approval in that cycle. Senatorial cosponsors listed include Roys, Ratcliff, Bradley, and Drake.
  • Next Steps (if advanced): The bill would move through committee hearings, potential amendments, floor debate, and votes in both chambers (Assembly and Senate), followed by eventual transmission to the governor for signature or veto. If amended, a new timeline would apply based on amendments.

5) Additional Notes

  • The available record shows no reported lobbying principals or lobbying activity for this bill during the current session, though multiple sponsors are listed.
  • The exact text of provisions (cap amounts, exceptions, and procedural specifics) is not included in the materials provided. For precise guidance, refer to the bill’s full text and any fiscal notes or analyses issued by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

If you’d like, I can tailor this summary further once the official bill language is available, including exact dollar figures, percentages, or dates specified in AB 1011.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.