On February 10, 2026, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in Paganini v. Cataract Eye Center of Cleveland, a case challenging the constitutionality of Ohio’s statutory cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases. Ohio law places caps on non-economic damages (pain and suffering, etc.), with a higher cap for certain catastrophic injuries. In this case, lower courts allowed a jury award that exceeded the statutory cap to stand, finding the cap unconstitutional as applied. OSMA joined others in filing an amicus—“friend of the court”—brief urging the Court to uphold the statute and reject efforts to strike down the caps. During oral argument, a number of justices’ questions appeared to focus on why the case was before the Court at all, given its 2007 decision in Arbino upholding the legislature’s damages framework as constitutional. Counsel for Paganini advanced arguments similar to those raised in the briefs, but several justices pressed for a clear explanation of how this case meaningfully differs from Arbino and why the statute should now be treated differently. A decision is pending and expected in the coming months, and we are watching closely given what it could mean for Ohio’s medical liability framework and the stability of the practice environment.

 

Separately, the State Medical Board of Ohio’s annual petition window to add new qualifying conditions for medical cannabis recommendation has closed for this cycle. Under Ohio law, any person may petition the Board to add a specific disease or condition, but petitions must meet defined evidentiary and procedural standards, including supporting scientific research. During the most recent submission period, the Board received one petition—for trichotillomania—and on February 11, 2026, voted to reject it. As a result, no new qualifying conditions will move forward this year.

 

OSMA will continue to follow these topics and keep members informed.