Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Montoya/Armstrong/Terrazas
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 3
/20/2025
SHORT TITLE
Medical Malpractice Punitive Claim
Evidence
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 379
ANALYST Esquibel
REVENUE*
(dollars in thousands)
Type FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
See Fiscal
Implications
Parentheses ( ) indicate revenue decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Relates to House Bills 374 and 378, and Senate Bills 121, 124, 176, 224, 444, and 449.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Attorney General’s Office (NMAG) Department of Health (DOH) Miners’ Hospital of New Mexico (MH) New Mexico Hospital Association (NMHA) New Mexico Medical Board (NMMB) New Mexico Medical Society (NMMS) Office of Superintendent of Insurance (OSI) University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center (UNMHSC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 379
House Bill 379 (HB379) adds new language to the Medical Malpractice Act that would require a
plaintiff seeking punitive damages to prove by clear and convincing evidence that “the acts of
the healthcare provider were made with deliberate disregard for the rights or safety of others.”
The bill would also cap the amount of punitive damages available to a plaintiff to no greater than
30 times the state median annual household income at the time the award is made.
This bill does not contain an effective date and, as a result, would go into effect 90 days after the
Legislature adjourns if enacted, or June 20, 2025.
House Bill 379 – Page 2
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The bill proposes to cap the amount of punitive damages available to a plaintiff to no greater
than 30 times the state median annual household income at the time the award is made.
According to the Census Bureau, the 2023 median household income for New Mexico was
$62,125.
The Office of Superintendent of Insurance administers the patient’s compensation fund (PCF);
however, punitive damages are not paid from the PCF.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The Attorney General’s Office notes the Supreme Court of the United States has said punitive
damages exceeding an amount greater than ten times the compensatory damages may violate the
Due Process and or Taking Clause of the United States Constitution. In theory, a situation could
arise where a plaintiff recovers, for example, $10 thousand in compensatory damages and then
receives substantially more than ten times in punitive damages.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
HB379 relates to Senate Bill 449 and House Bill 374, which seek to amend the Medical
Malpractice Act (MMA) to change the statutory definition of “occurrence” in Section 41-5-3(K).
The definitions for occurrence in the three bills are identical. However, HB378 would cap the
compensatory damages for medical malpractice to $600 thousand.
HB379 is related to Senate Bill 121, which would add language to Section 41-5-25 of the MMA
to provide immunity from liability to the third-party administrator of the patient’s compensation
fund for actions taken within the scope of their duties under the MMA. It is also related to Senate
Bill 124, which would add clauses to the Insurance Code to allow the superintendent of
insurance or delegated staff to issue civil investigative subpoenas prior to the issuance of a notice
of contemplated action and allow the superintendent to petition the district court to compel
compliance with any such subpoena.
HB379 relates to Senate Bill 176, which would add language to Section 41-5-6 of the MMA to
require payments from the patient’s compensation fund be made as expenses are incurred. It
would also require that punitive damages be divided between the prevailing party and the state,
with the state’s allocation going to the patient safety improvement fund. It would also cap
attorneys’ fees in an action under the MMA.
HB379 is related to Senate Bill 224, which would add a new section to the MMA to allow the
superintendent of insurance to intervene in mediation and court proceedings that involve the
Medical Malpractice Act.
Finally, HB379 relates to Senate Bill 444, which seeks to have a judge determine the amount of
punitive damages that should be awarded to a plaintiff.
House Bill 379 – Page 3
TECHNICAL ISSUES
The Office of Superintendent of Insurance reports the bill is not clear whether juries may be
advised of the limit on punitive damages. Elsewhere in the Medical Malpractice Act, a limit is
placed on the amount of compensatory damages a qualified healthcare provider can incur. In that
section it is clearly stated: “In jury cases, the jury shall not be given any instructions dealing with
the limitations provided in this section.” [see NMSA 1978, Section 41-5-6 (2023).]
A similar provision in HB379 would provide consistency and ensure that a jury’s award is not
influenced by knowledge of the limitations on awards of certain damages. In the event a jury
awards more than the amount permitted by statute, the judge would conform the verdict to the
law after trial
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
The New Mexico Medical Society notes New Mexico has some of the highest numbers of
medical malpractice lawsuits in the country and medical malpractice premiums are significantly
higher in New Mexico compared with other states.
The New Mexico Hospital Association notes hospitals across the state have seen increases in
malpractice plan premiums in the past four years and punitive damages have grown, potentially
affecting fiscal solvency for smaller hospitals.
The Department of Health notes many states have changed their medical malpractice laws to
reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. Malpractice insurance rate increases and lack of access
to medical malpractice insurance may disproportionately impact smaller, independent medical
providers who often serve rural, underserved communities.
RAE/hj/hg/sgs