Damages; increasing maximum limitation on compensation for noneconomic loss. Effective date.
SB 1065 increases Oklahoma’s statutory cap on noneconomic damages in civil actions arising from bodily injury. Under current law in the bill text, plaintiffs may recover unlimited economic damages, but noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering, loss of companionship, mental anguish, and similar intangible harms are capped. The bill raises that cap from $350,000 to $500,000, while preserving the existing exception that removes the cap entirely when the defendant’s conduct is proven by clear and convincing evidence to involve reckless disregard, gross negligence, fraud, or intentional/malicious conduct.
The bill also keeps in place procedural rules requiring the factfinder to separate economic and noneconomic damages and, in jury trials, to answer interrogatories identifying whether aggravating conduct was present. It continues to prohibit juries and counsel from being told about the damages cap, and it does not apply to Governmental Tort Claims Act cases or wrongful death actions. The bill updates the effective date so the amended section applies to civil actions filed on or after November 1, 2025, and the act itself becomes effective that same date.
SB 1065 would amend 23 O.S. 2021, Section 61.2, changing Oklahoma’s tort damages framework for bodily injury cases by increasing the noneconomic damages cap and delaying application to cases filed on or after November 1, 2025. The bill affects plaintiffs, defendants, insurers, and civil litigants in personal injury cases by increasing potential exposure for pain-and-suffering and other nonpecuniary losses, while leaving economic damages uncapped and preserving the existing uncapped-damages exception for especially culpable conduct.
The recorded votes suggest the bill had meaningful but not overwhelming support. It passed the Senate committee 7-2 and later passed Senate third reading 37-8, indicating a solid majority in favor but with a notable minority opposed. With no committee transcripts available, the available record suggests the bill was generally supported as a measured increase in recoverable damages, though not unanimously accepted.
The main point of contention is the higher noneconomic damages cap itself, which raises the maximum recovery for pain and suffering and related harms from $350,000 to $500,000. Supporters likely view the increase as a needed adjustment for injured plaintiffs, while opponents may see it as increasing liability costs and insurance exposure for businesses, professionals, and other defendants. Another likely issue is that the bill preserves the cap unless heightened misconduct is proven, reflecting a compromise between limiting tort awards and allowing full recovery in cases involving reckless, grossly negligent, fraudulent, or intentional conduct.