Idaho Personal Injury Settlement Amounts – Lawsuit Information Center Blog

According to Jury Verdict Research, the average personal injury award in Idaho was $429,119.
That data is a little old. There are a number of estimates for the average payout for an Idaho personal injury case. So this is most settlement amounts, not jury awards. The average payout for an Idaho personal injury claim that we have seen that seems the most accurate for 2023 is $45,000.
Below is a general outline of Idaho law in personal injury cases.
All states have statute of limitations laws that limit how long a potential plaintiff can wait before filing a civil lawsuit for personal injuries. The time limits imposed vary from state to state, but the effect is essentially the same. If you don’t file a lawsuit before the applicable statute of limitations period expires, you will lose your right to file suit.
The statute of limitations in Idaho for all personal injury claims is two years. Idaho Stat. § 5-219. This law states that all actions for personal injury (including medical malpractice) must be filed within two years of the date that the “cause of action accrues” or the claim will be time-barred.
To calculate precisely when Idaho’s 2-year statute of limitation expires, the most critical question is when the plaintiff’s “cause of action accrues.” Idaho courts have fully adopted the legal doctrine known as the “discovery rule” to establish when a cause of action occurs to start the 2-year statute of limitations clock. Under this rule, a cause of action accrues when the plaintiff first discovers or reasonably should have discovered that they were injured due to negligence.
In simple personal injury cases, such as auto accidents or dog bites, the date of discovery is always going to be the date that the accident and/or injury occurred. So the 2-year SOL period begins running right away. The discovery rule comes into play in more complicated cases, such as medical malpractice cases involving misdiagnosis. In those cases, the 2-year SOL might not start until years after the plaintiff’s injury occurs.
In many personal injury cases, the defense may argue that the plaintiff was partly (or entirely) at fault for the accident or cause of their injury. These are referred to as shared fault cases, and each state has its own particular rules for how to resolve liability in these circumstances. Idaho has adopted the modern rule called modified comparative fault.
Under the doctrine of comparative fault, each party bears responsibility for their own percentage share of fault in an accident, and a plaintiff’s damages will be reduced to that share. For example, if the plaintiff is found to be 20% at fault and the defendant is 80% at fault, the plaintiff’s damages would simply be reduced by 20%.
In pure comparative fault states, the plaintiff can recover damages no matter how high their percentage share of fault is. Idaho has modified the pure comparative fault rule with a 50% bar. Under this rule, a person found to be more than 50% at fault is completely barred from recovery. This means if you are 51% at fault for the accident, then you are unable to seek any damages.
Idaho is one of only a small handful of states that have enacted a law imposing an across-the-board maximum cap on damages in all tort cases (not just medical malpractice cases). Idaho’s damage cap limits the amount of non-economic damages (pain & suffering) that can be awarded in personal injury cases. Idaho Stat. § 6-1603. The cap adjusts upward each year. As of 2023, the maximum cap on pain and suffering damages is around $450,000.
It is important to note, however, that this cap only applies to non-economic damages. There is no limit on the amount of economic damages an Idaho injury lawyer can seek for a client in a personal injury lawsuit.
Idaho has not adopted a strict liability standard for cases involving dog bites. Instead, Idaho continues to follow the rule known as the “one bite” rule. Under this rule, Idaho dog owners will be held liable for injuries caused by their dog (or other animal) if the injured party can show that the owner “should have known” the animal was dangerous.
There are a number of national mass torts or “class actions” that involve hundreds of West Virginia plaintiffs, including claims our law firm is handling across the country:
Idaho has a fairly unique law states that before a plaintiff can file a medical malpractice lawsuit against a doctor, hospital, or other licensed healthcare provider, the claim must first be submitted to a hearing panel compiled by the Idaho Board of Medicine. This procedure is known as “prelitigation screening,” and not many states have this. The detailed rules regarding this requirement are set forth at Idaho Stat. § 6-1001.
The hearing panel reviews the relevant medical records and other materials provided by the plaintiff. After reviewing these materials, the panel decides whether the plaintiff’s malpractice claims appear to have merit and can even recommend a settlement. However, the panel’s decision is entirely non-binding, so the plaintiff can file their lawsuit no matter what the decision is.
The Idaho Supreme Court has issued a few interesting appellate decisions in medical malpractice lawsuits in 2023:
Working with local partner firms, our firm handles serious injury and wrongful death lawsuits in Idaho. We compensate our Idaho injury lawyers out of our own attorneys’ fees, so it doesn’t cost you anything to have two law firms instead of one. And you only owe a fee if you get settlement compensation or a jury payout for you.
If you were hurt and believe you have a potential civil tort claim, click here for a free no-obligation consultation or call us today at 800-553-8082 or get a free consultation online. 
Comments are closed.

Personal injury lawyers handling serious personal injury truck and auto accident, medical malpractice and products liability cases throughout the United States.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

source