## Facts

- Matthew Ferdon suffered a severe brachial plexus injury to his right arm during delivery by Dr. Michael J. Brockman, resulting in permanent deformity and partial paralysis and requiring ongoing treatment.
- Ferdon, through a guardian ad litem, sued Dr. Brockman and related health-care defendants for medical malpractice, seeking noneconomic damages; because claimed damages exceeded $200,000, the Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund was joined.
- Ferdon’s parents asserted derivative claims for loss of society and companionship.
- A jury found Dr. Brockman negligent and awarded Matthew $700,000 in noneconomic damages and his parents $87,600.
- The Fund moved to reduce Matthew’s noneconomic damages under Wis. Stat. § 893.55(4)(d), which capped noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions at $350,000 (1995 dollars), indexed for inflation.
- The circuit court applied the cap and reduced Matthew’s award; the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether Wis. Stat. § 893.55(4)(d)’s cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions violates equal protection under the Wisconsin Constitution by irrationally burdening the most severely injured plaintiffs.
2. Whether, under rational basis review, the cap is rationally related to asserted legislative objectives such as stabilizing malpractice insurance, controlling health-care costs, maintaining provider availability, and protecting the Fund’s financial condition.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and held the noneconomic damages cap unconstitutional under the Wisconsin Constitution’s equal protection guarantee.
- The court concluded the cap was not rationally related to the legislature’s stated objectives.
- The court remanded with directions to enter judgment consistent with the jury’s noneconomic damages award without applying the cap.

## Legal Principles

- Equal protection prohibits statutory classifications that are arbitrary or irrational, even in economic and social welfare legislation reviewed under rational basis scrutiny.
- A damages cap that fully compensates plaintiffs with noneconomic losses below the cap but reduces recovery for plaintiffs with greater noneconomic losses creates a classification that disproportionately burdens the most seriously injured.
- Under rational basis review, the state must show a real, non-speculative connection between the classification and legitimate governmental objectives; deference to legislative judgments does not require acceptance of unsupported or attenuated justifications.
- Where the record fails to support claims that a noneconomic damages cap materially advances cost control, insurance stability, access to care, or fund solvency, the cap fails equal protection.

## Conclusion

The court struck down Wisconsin’s medical malpractice noneconomic damages cap on equal protection grounds because it imposed unequal treatment on severely injured patients without a demonstrated rational relationship to the state’s asserted policy goals, and it reinstated the jury’s full noneconomic damages award.


Ferdon v. Wis. Patients Comp. Fund, 701 N.W.2d 440 (Wis. 2005)