Exemplary Damages in Colorado: Cap, Proof and Rules (2026)

Colorado allows punitive damages, which its statutes call exemplary damages, when an injury "is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct" (C.R.S. 13-21-102(1)(a)), but only if the plaintiff proves the wrong beyond a reasonable doubt (C.R.S. 13-25-127(2)). Under the general statute, the award generally may not exceed the amount of the actual damages, and a court may raise it to up to three times actual damages only for willful and wanton conduct during the case itself (13-21-102(3)).

Colorado also keeps exemplary damages out of the initial complaint, bars evidence of a party's income or net worth, takes no general share of the award, and shields public entities. For how other states compare, see punitive damages laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-18. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Colorado state law on exemplary (punitive) damages in civil cases: C.R.S. 13-21-102, the burden-of-proof statute 13-25-127, the wrongful death and medical negligence versions (13-21-203(3)-(5), 13-64-302.5), the survival statute 13-20-101, the Governmental Immunity Act sections named below, and two Colorado Supreme Court decisions. It does not cover compensatory or noneconomic damages caps (see Colorado medical malpractice law), wrongful death procedure, deadlines and beneficiaries (see Colorado wrongful death law), federal claims, or every statute that authorizes or limits exemplary damages for a particular claim beyond those named here.

Does Colorado allow punitive damages?

Yes. In Colorado, punitive damages are called exemplary damages; the terms describe the same remedy, and some Colorado statutes use both. The general rule is in C.R.S. 13-21-102(1)(a):

"In all civil actions in which damages are assessed by a jury for a wrong done to the person or to personal or real property, and the injury complained of is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, the jury, in addition to the actual damages sustained by such party, may award him reasonable exemplary damages. The amount of such reasonable exemplary damages shall not exceed an amount which is equal to the amount of the actual damages awarded to the injured party."

The statute allows them "in addition to the actual damages sustained," and they are not a separate claim. In Litterer v. Vail Summit Resorts, Inc., 2026 CO 65 (Sept. 21, 2026), the Colorado Supreme Court held that an exemplary damages award must attach to "an underlying and independent 'civil action' in which actual damages are assessed" and that "willful and wanton conduct" is not an independent tort; there, a release barred all of the plaintiff's underlying claims, so the request for exemplary damages fell with them.

What must be proven

Fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct. The injury must be "attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct." Section 13-21-102(1)(b) defines the third category:

"As used in this section, willful and wanton conduct means conduct purposefully committed which the actor must have realized as dangerous, done heedlessly and recklessly, without regard to consequences, or of the rights and safety of others, particularly the plaintiff."

The section does not define fraud or malice.

Burden of proof: beyond a reasonable doubt. C.R.S. 13-25-127(1) makes a preponderance of the evidence the rule in civil actions, "except as provided in subsection (2)," and subsection (2) provides:

"Exemplary damages against the party against whom the claim is asserted shall only be awarded in a civil action when the party asserting the claim proves beyond a reasonable doubt the commission of a wrong under the circumstances set forth in section 13-21-102. Nothing in this subsection (2) shall be construed as preventing a party asserting the claim from being awarded money damages or other appropriate relief, other than exemplary damages, if he sustains the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence."

So the same case can be decided on two burdens: actual damages by a preponderance, exemplary damages beyond a reasonable doubt.

Is there a cap on punitive damages in Colorado?

Yes. Under the general statute, exemplary damages may not exceed the amount of the actual damages awarded to the injured party (13-21-102(1)(a)). In Vickery v. Evans, No. 10SC281 (Colo. Dec. 12, 2011), the Colorado Supreme Court held that "the amount of the actual damages awarded" "refers not to the jury's assessment of total compensatory damages but to the compensatory damages awarded against the defendant as the direct result of that assessment, which necessarily include statutorily mandated prejudgment interest."

When the court may increase the award. Under 13-21-102(3), the court may increase any award of exemplary damages "to a sum not to exceed three times the amount of actual damages, if it is shown that:"

"(a) The defendant has continued the behavior or repeated the action which is the subject of the claim against the defendant in a willful and wanton manner, either against the plaintiff or another person or persons, during the pendency of the case; or (b) The defendant has acted in a willful and wanton manner during the pendency of the action in a manner which has further aggravated the damages of the plaintiff when the defendant knew or should have known such action would produce aggravation."

The increase is the court's decision and turns on conduct during the case, not on how bad the original conduct was.

When the court may reduce or disallow the award. Under 13-21-102(2), the court "may reduce or disallow the award of exemplary damages to the extent that: (a) The deterrent effect of the damages has been accomplished; or (b) The conduct which resulted in the award has ceased; or (c) The purpose of such damages has otherwise been served."

No drunk-driving or felony exception in the general statute. Section 13-21-102 has a single cap formula. It contains no separate exception for impaired driving, felony conduct or intentional harm; its only route above the 1:1 limit is the court's during-the-case increase in subsection (3).

Claim-specific limits

Some statutes for particular claims set their own rules, for example:

• Bias-motivated crime. In a civil action under the bias-motivated crime statute (C.R.S. 13-21-106.5), on proof of the knowledge and intent described in C.R.S. 18-9-121(2), the jury may award punitive damages, and "said punitive damages shall not be subject to the limitations in section 13-21-102 or section 13-21-102.5."
• Employment discrimination under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. Under C.R.S. 24-34-405(3)(d), "the total amount of compensatory and punitive damages awarded pursuant to this subsection (3) shall not exceed the amounts specified in 42 U.S.C. sec. 1981a (b)(3)," and for employers with fewer than fifteen employees the combined total may not exceed ten thousand dollars (one to four employees) or twenty-five thousand dollars (five to fourteen employees), measured as the statute describes. The statute also provides that "punitive damages are not recoverable against the state or any political subdivision, commission, department, institution, or school district of the state." Punitive damages under the Act require clear and convincing evidence of malice or reckless indifference, and the court may not award them if the employer shows good-faith efforts to comply and to prevent discriminatory and unfair employment practices (24-34-405(3)(b)(I)); a good-faith accommodation effort also bars them in disability-accommodation claims (24-34-405(3)(b)(II)) and pregnancy-accommodation claims (24-34-402.3(7)).
• Workplace claims under article 14.4 of Title 8. Under C.R.S. 8-14.4-106(3)(b), a plaintiff may recover punitive damages by showing "by clear and convincing evidence" that the defendant acted "with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of the plaintiff," but "if the defendant demonstrates good-faith efforts to comply with this article 14.4 and to prevent discriminatory, adverse, and retaliatory employment practices in the workplace, the court shall not award punitive damages against the defendant."
• Trade secrets. Under C.R.S. 7-74-104(2), if the misappropriation is attended by "fraud, malice, or a willful and wanton disregard of the injured party's right and feelings, the court or the jury may award exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding the award made under subsection (1) of this section."
• Recordings destroyed or seized by a peace officer. Under C.R.S. 13-21-128(1)(c), "the court may order punitive damages up to fifteen thousand dollars and attorney fees to the property owner upon a finding that the denial by the law enforcement agency to reimburse the person pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection (1) was made in bad faith."
• Insurance anticompetitive practices. A person injured by conduct barred by C.R.S. 10-4-415(1) may recover "punitive damages not to exceed actual monetary loss and expense" (10-4-415(2)(b)).
• Small fixed ranges. A few statutes set a dollar range for actual and exemplary damages combined, such as consumer-credit discrimination (not less than $100 nor more than $1,000 for actual and exemplary damages, 5-5-206) and judgment-lien representations made without a good-faith identity check (13-52-102(4)(b), same range); a common carrier that does not transport a livestock shipment within the time 40-9-106 requires owes actual damages plus exemplary damages of $100 to $1,000 (40-9-107).

Medical malpractice noneconomic caps do not reach exemplary damages. C.R.S. 13-64-302(1)(a) provides that both derivative and direct noneconomic loss or injury do "not include punitive or exemplary damages." Exemplary damages against a health-care professional are governed instead by 13-64-302.5 and 13-21-102, described below.

The U.S. Supreme Court's due-process limits on the size of punitive awards also apply to Colorado verdicts; the punitive damages hub explains them. Under federal law, punitive damages are generally taxable income, even when they arise from a physical injury (26 U.S.C. 104(a)(2)); the personal injury settlement amounts guide covers taxes.

Does Colorado take a share of the award?

No general Colorado statute sends any part of an exemplary award in an ordinary tort case to the State or a fund. Sections 13-21-102, 13-21-203 and 13-64-302.5 contain no allocation provision; the heading of 13-64-302.5 mentions the distribution of damages collected, but its text has no distribution subsection.

The one diversion in the statutes covered here is narrow. Under C.R.S. 24-75-201.7, "any punitive or exemplary damages awarded to any party to a lawsuit brought to enforce the restriction on state spending as set forth in section 24-75-201.1 shall be deposited and credited to the property tax relief fund."

How a claim is pleaded and decided

Not in the first complaint. C.R.S. 13-21-102(1.5)(a) provides:

"A claim for exemplary damages in an action governed by this section may not be included in any initial claim for relief. A claim for exemplary damages in an action governed by this section may be allowed by amendment to the pleadings only after the exchange of initial disclosures pursuant to rule 26 of the Colorado rules of civil procedure and the plaintiff establishes prima facie proof of a triable issue. After the plaintiff establishes the existence of a triable issue of exemplary damages, the court may, in its discretion, allow additional discovery on the issue of exemplary damages as the court deems appropriate."

Wrongful death and medical negligence cases have their own timing rules (see below), and 13-21-102(1.5)(b) excludes them from this one.

No income or net worth evidence. Colorado keeps the defendant's wealth out of the decision: "In any civil action in which exemplary damages may be awarded, evidence of the income or net worth of a party shall not be considered in determining the appropriateness or amount of such damages" (13-21-102(6)).

Who decides. Section 13-21-102(1)(a) speaks of actions "in which damages are assessed by a jury" and lets "the jury" award exemplary damages; the court then has the power to reduce, disallow or increase the award under subsections (2) and (3).

Arbitration. "Unless otherwise provided by law, exemplary damages shall not be awarded in administrative or arbitration proceedings, even if the award or decision is enforced or approved in an action commenced in a court" (13-21-102(5)). Medical malpractice arbitration is an exception: under C.R.S. 13-64-403(1.5), "exemplary damages may be awarded in any arbitration proceeding held pursuant to this section in accordance with section 13-21-102 (1) to (3) and (6)," and the district court may modify such an award "upon petition to the district court alleging that the award of such damages was either excessive or inadequate."

Punitive damages in Colorado wrongful death cases

Colorado's wrongful death statute repeats the exemplary damages rule. Under C.R.S. 13-21-203(3)(a), in a wrongful death action "in which damages are assessed by the trier of fact, and the death complained of is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, the trier of fact, in addition to the actual damages, may award reasonable exemplary damages. The amount of such reasonable exemplary damages shall not exceed an amount that is equal to the amount of the actual damages awarded to the injured party." Willful and wanton conduct has the same meaning as in 13-21-102(1)(b) (13-21-203(3)(b)), and the court has the same power to increase the award to up to three times actual damages for willful and wanton conduct during the case (13-21-203(5)).

The pleading rule is stricter in timing. Under 13-21-203(3)(c)(I), the claim "may not be included in any initial claim for relief" and "shall be allowed by amendment to the pleadings only after the passage of sixty days following the exchange of initial disclosures pursuant to rule 26 of the Colorado rules of civil procedure and the plaintiff establishes prima facie proof of a triable issue."

Under 13-21-203(6), "the provisions of this section shall not apply to a peace officer, as described in section 16-2.5-101, C.R.S., or to any firefighter, as defined in section 18-3-201 (1.5), C.R.S., for claims arising out of injuries sustained from an act or omission of the peace officer or firefighter acting in the performance of his or her duties and within the scope of his or her employment."

When the defendant dies. The survival statute provides that "punitive damages shall not be awarded nor penalties adjudged after the death of the person against whom such punitive damages or penalties are claimed" (C.R.S. 13-20-101(1)). Deadlines, beneficiaries and the other damages rules are on the Colorado wrongful death page.

Medical negligence: health-care professionals

C.R.S. 13-64-302.5 adds a separate layer for claims against health-care professionals:

• Timing. Exemplary damages "may not be included in any initial claim for relief" and may be added by amendment "only after the substantial completion of discovery and only after the plaintiff establishes prima facie proof of a triable issue" (13-64-302.5(3)).
• Judge's or arbitrator's gate. The judge or arbitrator, "in his discretion, and only if it is shown at the trial or proceeding that the action complained of was attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, may allow the trier of fact to impose reasonable exemplary damages" (13-64-302.5(4)(a)). The degree of proof is the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of 13-25-127(2), and the standards and amount follow 13-21-102 (13-64-302.5(4)(b)).
• Approved drugs and products. "No exemplary damages shall be imposed under subsection (4) of this section which were the result of the use of any drug or product approved for use by any state or federal regulatory agency and used within the approved standards therefor, or used in accordance with standards of prudent health-care professionals" (13-64-302.5(5)(a)).
• Acts of others. "No exemplary damages shall be assessed against a health-care professional as a result of the acts of others unless he specifically directed the act to be done or ratified the same" (13-64-302.5(6)).

For noneconomic damages caps and other malpractice rules, see Colorado medical malpractice law.

Employers

Colorado's general exemplary damages statute does not set a separate rule for when an employer answers for an employee's conduct. Two statutes touch the question. For health-care professionals, 13-64-302.5(6) bars exemplary damages for the acts of others unless the professional "specifically directed the act to be done or ratified the same." And C.R.S. 13-21-111.5(1.5), which lets a plaintiff pursue direct negligence claims against an employer even after the employer admits vicarious liability, adds that "nothing in this subsection (1.5) permits a plaintiff to recover compensatory and exemplary damages more than once for the same injury."

Government defendants and public employees

• Public entities. "A public entity shall not be liable either directly or by indemnification for punitive or exemplary damages or for damages for outrageous conduct, except as otherwise determined by a public entity pursuant to section 24-10-118 (5)" (C.R.S. 24-10-114(4)(a)).
• Public employees. "A public employee shall not be liable for punitive or exemplary damages arising out of an act or omission occurring during the performance of his duties and within the scope of his employment, unless such act or omission was willful and wanton" (24-10-118(1)(c)). A public entity may, by resolution adopted at an open public meeting, decide that it is in the public interest to "defend a public employee against a claim for punitive damages or pay or settle any punitive damage claim against a public employee" (24-10-118(5)). A complaint alleging that a public employee acted willfully and wantonly must state the specific factual basis of the allegation, or the claim is dismissed (24-10-110(5)(a)-(b)). If exemplary damages are sought on that basis and the plaintiff does not substantially prevail on the willful-and-wanton claim, "the court shall award attorney fees against the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney or both and in favor of the public employee" (24-10-110(5)(c)).
• Peace officers. Political subdivisions must indemnify their paid peace officers and reserve officers for on-duty liability and judgments for torts within the scope of employment, "except a judgment for exemplary damages" (C.R.S. 29-5-111(1)).
• Law enforcement agencies and recordings. Section 13-21-128(1)(c), described above, allows punitive damages of up to fifteen thousand dollars on a bad-faith denial by a law enforcement agency; the section does not say how it relates to the 24-10-114(4)(a) bar.

Insurance and other statutes that address exemplary damages

Insurance. In Lira v. Shelter Insurance Co. (Colo. 1996), the Colorado Supreme Court stated: "The public policy of Colorado prohibits an insurance carrier from providing insurance coverage for punitive damages." Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage under C.R.S. 10-4-609(1)(c) likewise covers the difference between the at-fault driver's liability limits and "the amount of the damages sustained, excluding exemplary damages." For other rules in a crash claim, see Colorado car accident law.

FAIR Plan bad faith. In a bad-faith action against the FAIR Plan association, damages "are limited to compensatory damages for economic and noneconomic losses. A court may award punitive damages only if the association's breach was accompanied by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct" (C.R.S. 10-4-1810.5(2)(c)).

Housing discrimination. In a private action under C.R.S. 24-34-505.6, "the court may award to the plaintiff actual and punitive damages."

Public utilities. Under C.R.S. 40-7-102(1), "if the court finds that the act or omission was willful, the court, in addition to the actual damages, may award exemplary damages."

Colorado exemplary damages at a glance

Recent changes

Colorado's core exemplary damages rules are long-standing: the pleading restriction in 13-21-102(1.5) was added in 2003, effective August 6, 2003, and C.R.S. 13-25-127 dates to 1971 and 1972 laws, with a 1995 amendment to its subsections (1) and (3). HB 24-1472, effective January 1, 2025, changed noneconomic damages caps, including 13-21-203(1), but did not change the exemplary damages subsection of the wrongful death statute.

In 2026, the General Assembly passed HB26-1236, which would have repealed the bar on exemplary damages in arbitration. The Governor vetoed it on June 2, 2026, and it did not become law, so 13-21-102(5) remains in force.

Related pages

• Punitive damages laws by state
• Colorado wrongful death law
• Colorado medical malpractice law
• Colorado car accident law

This article provides general legal information about Colorado exemplary (punitive) damages law as of 2026-10-18. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Colorado.

Last updated: 2026-10-18.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Colorado allow punitive damages?

Yes, under the name exemplary damages. C.R.S. 13-21-102(1)(a) allows a jury to award reasonable exemplary damages when the injury is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, and C.R.S. 13-25-127(2) requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

What is the cap on punitive damages in Colorado?

Under the general statute, exemplary damages may not exceed the amount of the actual damages awarded (C.R.S. 13-21-102(1)(a)). The court may increase the award to up to three times actual damages if the defendant continued the conduct or aggravated the plaintiff's damages in a willful and wanton manner during the case (13-21-102(3)). Some statutes for particular claims, such as employment discrimination and trade secrets, set their own limits, and bias-motivated crime claims are outside the general limits.

What is the burden of proof for exemplary damages in Colorado?

Beyond a reasonable doubt. C.R.S. 13-25-127(2) provides that exemplary damages shall only be awarded when the party asserting the claim proves beyond a reasonable doubt the commission of a wrong under the circumstances in 13-21-102. Other civil claims are decided by a preponderance of the evidence (13-25-127(1)).

Can exemplary damages be included in the initial complaint in Colorado?

No. Under C.R.S. 13-21-102(1.5)(a), a claim for exemplary damages may not be included in any initial claim for relief and may be added by amendment only after the exchange of initial disclosures and prima facie proof of a triable issue. Wrongful death claims wait sixty days after initial disclosures (13-21-203(3)(c)(I)), and medical negligence claims wait until discovery is substantially complete (13-64-302.5(3)).

Are punitive damages available in a Colorado wrongful death case?

C.R.S. 13-21-203(3)(a) allows reasonable exemplary damages in a wrongful death action when the death is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, limited to the amount of the actual damages awarded, subject to the court's power to increase the award for conduct during the case (13-21-203(5)). Under 13-20-101(1), punitive damages are not awarded after the death of the person against whom they are claimed.

Does Colorado take part of a punitive damages award?

No general Colorado statute does. The only diversion in the statutes covered here is C.R.S. 24-75-201.7, which sends exemplary damages awarded in a suit to enforce the state-spending restriction to the property tax relief fund.

Does insurance cover punitive damages in Colorado?

In Lira v. Shelter Insurance Co. (1996), the Colorado Supreme Court stated that the public policy of Colorado prohibits an insurance carrier from providing insurance coverage for punitive damages. Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage also excludes exemplary damages (C.R.S. 10-4-609(1)(c)).

Are punitive damages available against the government in Colorado?

A public entity is not liable for punitive or exemplary damages, directly or by indemnification, except as the entity itself decides under C.R.S. 24-10-118(5) (24-10-114(4)(a)). A public employee is not liable for them for acts within the scope of employment unless the act or omission was willful and wanton (24-10-118(1)(c)).

Are punitive damages allowed in arbitration in Colorado?

Generally not. Unless otherwise provided by law, exemplary damages shall not be awarded in administrative or arbitration proceedings (C.R.S. 13-21-102(5)). Medical malpractice arbitration under 13-64-403 is one exception. A 2026 bill to repeal the arbitration bar, HB26-1236, was vetoed on June 2, 2026.