A Bernalillo County jury this week awarded more than $40 million in damages against Presbyterian Healthcare Services following allegations that medical personnel failed to diagnose an infant’s low blood glucose levels shortly after birth. The case, which resulted in permanent brain injury to the child, represents one of the largest medical malpractice verdicts in New Mexico history and underscores several important issues for attorneys who handle malpractice litigation.
This article examines the underlying facts, the structure of the verdict, the role of punitive damages, and the broader legal environment in which this decision occurred.
The Leonard Case: Background and Verdict
Samantha and Patrick Leonard filed suit on behalf of their son, born prematurely at Presbyterian Hospital in April 2019. Their central allegation was that the infant’s glucose levels were not tested in accordance with Presbyterian’s policies, which require monitoring of premature newborns.
The child was discharged after a two-day stay. Within a week, he developed concerning symptoms and was readmitted. On the eighth day, he experienced seizures, respiratory arrest, and eventual cardiac arrest. At that point, physicians tested his glucose levels and identified severe hypoglycemia. The plaintiffs argued that the delay caused permanent developmental and neurological injuries.
After a two-week trial before Judge Denise Barela-Shepherd, the jury awarded:
- $25 million to the child
- $825,000 to the parents
- $15 million in punitive damages
Jurors found that two physicians and two nurses engaged in conduct rising to the level of “reckless or wanton,” a finding that supported the punitive damages component.
Presbyterian has publicly stated that it considers the judgment excessive and intends to pursue post-trial relief.
Punitive Damages: A Significant Element
The punitive damages award is particularly notable. While compensatory damages in malpractice litigation can be substantial, punitive awards are relatively rare. For a jury to impose them, the conduct generally must reflect more than negligence: it must demonstrate conscious disregard of a known risk or indifference to patient safety.
In this case, jurors appeared to focus on the hospital’s own policies. Evidence indicated that Presbyterian required glucose testing for premature infants within 24 hours of birth, but did not follow that policy. For jurors, the failure to adhere to internal standards may have elevated the conduct from negligent to reckless.
From a broader litigation standpoint, this reinforces the need for both plaintiff and defense attorneys to scrutinize institutional protocols. Internal policies can become central to establishing or defending against claims of recklessness.
Context: A Pattern of Large Verdicts
The Leonard case follows another significant award earlier this year. In January 2025, a jury awarded nearly $17 million to a woman who carried a surgical instrument in her abdomen for two months after a Presbyterian procedure. That award also included $15 million in punitive damages.
New Mexico malpractice juries are showing greater receptiveness to punitive claims, particularly in cases involving systemic or institutional failures.
Legislative and Insurance Landscape
The verdict also intersects with ongoing debates in New Mexico over the state’s malpractice framework.
Earlier this year, Senate Bill 176 proposed changes to the Medical Malpractice Act, including limits on attorney fees. The bill did not advance, facing strong opposition from trial lawyers and patient advocates. Proponents argued that high verdicts and insurance costs are discouraging physicians from practicing in the state.
Data from Think New Mexico highlight the financial pressures. In 2022, New Mexico had the highest medical malpractice insurance loss ratio in the nation, with insurers paying out 183% of collected premiums. This made New Mexico one of only seven states where insurers incurred a loss on malpractice coverage.
The Leonard verdict may intensify calls for legislative reform. At the same time, trial attorneys will likely point to cases such as this as evidence of the need for accountability mechanisms to protect patients.
Looking Ahead
Whether the Leonard award will withstand post-trial motions or appellate review remains uncertain. Presbyterian has already announced its intent to challenge the judgment as excessive. Even if the award is reduced, however, the verdict signals that jurors in New Mexico are willing to award both substantial compensatory damages and punitive damages in malpractice cases where institutional failures are at issue.
For attorneys, the key takeaway is that malpractice litigation in New Mexico, and potentially in other jurisdictions with similar dynamics, is moving toward heightened scrutiny of healthcare systems’ compliance with their own standards. The result is a legal environment where both compensatory and punitive exposure is significant.
