N※N

Florida House Passes Bill to Raise Damages Caps for Government Negligence

  //house-home.news-articles.net/content/2026/02/1 .. aise-damages-caps-for-government-negligence.html
  Published in House and Home on Tuesday, February 10th 2026 at 1:28 GMT by Action News Jax
      Locales: Florida, UNITED STATES

Tallahassee, FL - February 10th, 2026 - The Florida House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed House Bill (HB) 133 on Monday, a measure poised to significantly alter the landscape of government accountability and victim compensation within the state. The bill, which cleared the House with a resounding 116-2 vote, seeks to raise the caps on damages awarded to Floridians injured or killed due to negligence on the part of government entities. Currently, these caps stand at $500,000 for individual claims and $1 million for wrongful death suits. HB 133 would double the individual cap to $1 million and increase the wrongful death limit to $2 million.

While the bill's immediate impetus stems from a particularly heartbreaking case, the implications extend far beyond a single tragedy. The story of 6-year-old Heaven Cabry, who tragically died in 2023 following a delayed emergency response stemming from a dispatcher error, served as a catalyst for legislative action. Her parents, after successfully suing the Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department, were limited to a $500,000 settlement - a sum deemed inadequate to address the profound loss and lasting impact of their daughter's death. Rep. Bruce Antinori (R-Margate), the bill's sponsor, explicitly linked the legislation to Heaven's case, stating it aims to "ensure that when the government makes a mistake that causes catastrophic harm, the victims and their families have a chance to be made whole."

However, the debate surrounding sovereign immunity and damage caps in Florida is far more complex than a single, emotionally resonant story. For decades, Florida has maintained relatively low caps on damages in cases involving governmental negligence, citing concerns about budgetary impact and the potential for frivolous lawsuits. Critics of the current system argue these caps effectively shield government agencies from full accountability, leaving victims with insufficient compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other damages.

The existing limitations frequently result in a significant disparity between the compensation awarded to those injured by private citizens or businesses and those harmed by governmental actions. This imbalance, advocates for increased caps contend, creates a two-tiered system of justice. HB 133 represents a step towards rectifying that imbalance, bringing Florida more in line with other states that have higher or no caps on government liability.

The bill's journey to passage hasn't been without discussion. While enjoying broad bipartisan support in the House, concerns were raised during debate regarding the potential for increased insurance costs for local governments and the possibility of increased litigation. Proponents countered that raising the caps wouldn't necessarily lead to a surge in lawsuits, but rather encourage responsible governance and a greater emphasis on preventing negligence in the first place. They also point to the fact that the increased caps still represent a limitation on potential damages, and that cases would still require substantial evidence to prove negligence.

The Senate now holds the key to the bill's fate. Similar attempts to raise these caps have stalled in the Senate in previous legislative sessions, often facing resistance from fiscal conservatives wary of opening the state up to potentially substantial financial liabilities. However, the compelling narrative surrounding Heaven Cabry's case, coupled with growing public awareness of the issue, may prove to be a powerful force in swaying Senate sentiment.

Several legal experts are already anticipating a vigorous debate in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Specifically, the discussion will likely center around the balance between protecting taxpayers and ensuring fair compensation for victims of government negligence. Some anticipate amendments being proposed to further refine the scope of the bill or to introduce safeguards against frivolous claims.

The implications of HB 133 extend beyond individual cases. If passed, it could incentivize state and local government agencies to invest more heavily in training, safety protocols, and risk management procedures, ultimately reducing the incidence of negligent acts. Furthermore, the bill could send a strong message that government accountability is a priority in Florida, fostering greater public trust and confidence in the institutions that serve the state's citizens.