Estate of McCall v. United States

Michelle McCall (plaintiff) died of blood loss while giving birth at a Florida military hospital run by the United States government (defendant). McCall’s family sued for malpractice and was awarded $1 million in economic damages and $2 million in noneconomic damages. Each of McCall’s parents received $750,000 of the noneconomic damages, and her infant son received $500,000. However, Florida had a statute limiting noneconomic damages (i.e., pain and suffering or loss of companionship) in wrongful-death malpractice cases to $1 million total per incident, no matter how many victims had a claim. This statute cut the McCall family’s noneconomic-damages award in half, leaving the family $1 million to split three ways. The Florida legislature had passed this statute to address a perceived malpractice-insurance-premium crisis that was driving doctors out of Florida. The legislature believed that a cap on noneconomic damages would help reduce the cost of malpractice premiums in Florida. Insurance companies were charging a great deal for Florida malpractice-insurance premiums, sometimes as much as $200,000 annually for $1 million in coverage. At that time, 80 percent of the obstetricians in one area did not even carry malpractice insurance. However, a study showed that only 7.5 percent of Florida malpractice payments over $1 million were from jury verdicts, casting doubt on the impact that large verdicts had on premiums. Also, despite the major expense of increasing their reserve amounts, the insurance companies were still making substantial profits before the legislation was passed. Yet the malpractice premiums were still high. One expert believed that the premiums were high due to normal fluctuations in the national insurance market. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reviewed the statutory reduction of the McCalls’ awards and ruled that the Florida statute did not violate the Equal Protection Clause in the United States Constitution. However, the Eleventh Circuit certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court, asking whether the statute might violate the due-process protections in the Florida Constitution.