## Facts

- Diana K. Hilburn was injured when a truck owned by Enerpipe Ltd. rear-ended the vehicle in which she was a passenger.
- Enerpipe admitted its driver’s negligence and conceded vicarious liability; trial proceeded on damages only.
- The jury awarded Hilburn $335,000: $33,490.86 for medical expenses and $301,509.14 for noneconomic loss.
- K.S.A. 60-19a02 imposed a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages in personal injury actions, prohibited instructing the jury on the cap, and required the court to reduce any verdict exceeding the cap.
- The district court reduced noneconomic damages to $250,000 and entered judgment for $283,490.86.

## Issues

1. Whether K.S.A. 60-19a02’s noneconomic-damages cap violates Section 5 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights (right to trial by jury) by intruding on the jury’s determination of damages.
2. Whether, in evaluating a Section 5 challenge, the court should apply a Section 18 “quid pro quo” analysis (and, if so, whether the cap survives that test).

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and the district court and remanded with directions to enter judgment on the jury’s full verdict.
- The court held K.S.A. 60-19a02 is facially unconstitutional under Section 5 because it overrides the jury’s determination of noneconomic damages.
- The court declined to apply a Section 18 “quid pro quo” framework to the Section 5 jury-trial challenge.

## Legal Principles

- Section 5 (“The right of trial by jury shall be inviolate”) preserves the civil jury-trial right as it existed at common law when the Kansas Constitution was ratified, including the jury’s role in determining noneconomic damages in personal injury actions.
- A statute that mandates post-verdict reduction of a jury’s noneconomic-damages award, while keeping the cap from the jury, impermissibly interferes with the jury’s protected function and violates Section 5.
- Section 18 “quid pro quo” analysis used for remedy-clause challenges does not govern Section 5 challenges to legislative restrictions on the jury’s damages determination.

## Conclusion

Kansas’ statutory cap on noneconomic damages in personal injury actions was held facially unconstitutional because it requires courts to reduce the jury’s noneconomic-damages verdict, thereby violating the state constitutional right to trial by jury.


Hilburn v. Enerpipe Ltd., 442 P.3d 509 (Kan. 2019)