Medical Malpractice Laws in California (2026): Deadlines & Caps

California medical malpractice claims are governed by a strict filing deadline, a unique non-economic damages cap that now rises every year, and a 90-day pre-suit notice requirement. This page explains the current law for 2026, with each key figure traced to the California statute. It is general legal information, not legal advice.

The Deadline to Sue (Statute of Limitations)

Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5, an action for injury or death against a health care provider based on professional negligence must be filed within three years from the date of injury or one year from the date the plaintiff discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first. The one-year discovery clock and the three-year outer limit operate together, so a plaintiff must satisfy both.

The three-year outer limit is not absolute. Section 340.5 tolls it in three situations: proof of fraud, intentional concealment, or the presence of a foreign body that has no therapeutic or diagnostic purpose. In a retained-foreign-object case, the patient generally has one year from discovery to file.

Missing the deadline almost always bars the claim, so the date should be confirmed early with counsel.

Deadlines for Minors

Section 340.5 sets separate rules for children. A minor must generally file within three years of the wrongful act. For a child under the age of six, the action must be brought within three years or before the child's eighth birthday, whichever provides the longer period. Parents and guardians should not assume a child's claim waits until adulthood, because the med-mal statute narrows the usual tolling for minors.

Statute of Repose

California does not have a separate statute of repose for medical malpractice beyond the three-year outer limit built into section 340.5. That three-year cap functions as the practical absolute deadline, subject only to the fraud, concealment, and foreign-object exceptions noted above.

Damage Caps Under MICRA

California's Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) caps non-economic damages, meaning pain, suffering, disfigurement, and similar losses. The cap is codified at California Civil Code section 3333.2. For decades the cap sat at a flat $250,000, but Assembly Bill 35 (2022) replaced that figure with a schedule that rises every January 1.

For non-death (personal-injury) cases, the cap began at $350,000 on January 1, 2023 and increases by $40,000 each year until it reaches $750,000 on January 1, 2033. For wrongful-death cases, it began at $500,000 and increases by $50,000 each year until it reaches $1,000,000 on January 1, 2033. Applying that schedule, the 2026 caps are $470,000 in injury cases and $650,000 in wrongful-death cases.

Beginning January 1, 2034, both caps will adjust upward by 2 percent annually for inflation. Because the figures change every January, anyone evaluating a claim should confirm the cap for the year in question.

What the Cap Does and Does Not Limit

MICRA caps only non-economic damages. Economic damages, including past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and lost earning capacity, are not capped under section 3333.2. AB 35 also restructured the cap so that separate limits can apply to up to three categories of defendants: health care providers, health care institutions, and unaffiliated providers or institutions at a different facility. Where more than one category is at fault, the applicable caps can stack.

Certificate or Affidavit of Merit

Unlike many states, California does not require a plaintiff to file a certificate or affidavit of merit, or to obtain a pre-suit expert review, as a condition of filing. There is no screening panel.

That said, California courts require expert testimony to establish the applicable standard of care and how the provider breached it, except in rare cases where the negligence is obvious to a layperson. As a practical matter, a viable case still needs a qualified medical expert, even though no affidavit is filed at the outset.

Pre-Suit Notice of Intent to Sue

California Code of Civil Procedure section 364 requires a plaintiff to give a health care provider at least 90 days' notice of the intention to file before commencing a professional-negligence action. No particular form is required, but the notice must state the legal basis of the claim and the type of loss, including the nature of the injuries.

If the 90-day notice is served within the last 90 days of the limitations period, section 364 extends the deadline by 90 days from the date of service. The notice is not a jurisdictional prerequisite, but failing to follow it can create procedural problems, so it is treated as a required step.

Standard of Care and Who May Be Liable

A California medical malpractice claim turns on whether the provider met the standard of care that a reasonably careful provider in the same specialty would have followed. Doctors, surgeons, nurses, hospitals, clinics, and other licensed health care providers can be defendants, and hospitals may be vicariously liable for the negligence of employees. Proving the standard of care and its breach generally requires expert medical testimony.

Comparative Negligence

California follows pure comparative negligence, adopted by the California Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975). A patient who is partly at fault can still recover, but the award is reduced in proportion to the patient's share of fault. Even a plaintiff found mostly responsible may recover the remaining percentage, which distinguishes California from states that bar recovery at 50 percent fault. In a malpractice case, comparative fault might arise where a patient did not follow post-treatment instructions, though the analysis is fact-specific and decided by the jury.

How the Per-Category Caps Work

AB 35 changed not only the dollar amounts but the structure of the cap. Before the amendment, a single MICRA cap applied no matter how many defendants were involved. Now the statute allows a separate cap for each of three defendant categories: one or more health care providers acting in concert, one or more health care institutions, and unaffiliated providers or institutions whose independent negligence occurred at a separate facility.

Where a case involves negligence across more than one category, the applicable caps can apply separately to each, so the total non-economic recovery available can be a multiple of the single-category figure. Because this turns on how the defendants are classified and whether they acted in concert, the practical effect of the caps in any given case should be assessed by counsel.

Wrongful-Death Medical Malpractice

When malpractice causes death, eligible survivors (such as a spouse, domestic partner, children, or other heirs) may bring a wrongful-death action. The same MICRA cap framework applies, with the higher wrongful-death non-economic cap ($650,000 in 2026) rather than the injury cap. Deadlines and the list of who may sue differ from a personal-injury claim, so families should confirm both with counsel.

How to Evaluate and Preserve a Possible Claim

If you believe medical care caused harm, request complete medical records promptly and write down the timeline of events while details are fresh. Most California medical malpractice attorneys offer a free initial consultation and work on a contingency fee, meaning the fee comes from any recovery. No attorney can guarantee an outcome or a dollar amount, and every case depends on its specific facts and the governing deadlines.