A Summary of Georgia’s 2025 Tort Reform
CLICK HERE TO VIEW DETAILED ARTICLE
NEW LAWS APPLICABLE TO PENDING CASES
(1) Clarification Regarding Pain and Suffering Claims (Anchoring): O.C.G.A. § 9-10-184(b) clarifies that, in closing arguments, counsel may only argue the worth or monetary value of noneconomic damages if it is rationally related to the evidence.
(2) Changes to the Timing For Answers and Stays of Discovery: Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-12(a), when a motion to dismiss or motion for more definite statement is filed, a defendant’s answer will be due within 15 days after the court’s action on such motion. Filing a motion to dismiss will stay the case until the court rules on that motion, unless the defendant files an answer which immediately terminates the stay. See O.C.G.A. § 9-11-12(j).
(3) Voluntary Dismissals: According to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-41 plaintiff may file a written notice of dismissal any time before 60 days after the opposing party serves its answer or by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared after that 60 day period.
(4) Limitations on Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Costs: O.C.G.A. § 9-15-16 prohibits the recovery of the same attorney’s fees, court costs, or expenses of litigation more than once unless the statute, or contract, specifically authorizes the recovery for such duplicate fees, costs, and expenses of litigation.
(5) Bifurcated Trials: O.C.G.A. § 51-12-15 permits any party to demand, in writing before the entry of a pre-trial order, a trial in separate phases to have fault determined in the first phase of trial before a second phase of trial which would then be commenced to determine compensatory damages, if necessary. If the jury awards damages, the trial is commenced a third time to consider punitive damages and attorney’s fees. The court may reject this election only upon objection by another party, if the court determines the alleged injuries involve a sexual offense or the amount in controversy is less than $150,000.
NEW LAWS APPLICABLE TO TORTS ARISING ON OR AFTER APRIL 21, 2025
(1) The Provisions Regarding Negligent Security: Negligent security cases now require the plaintiff to prove that the wrongful conduct of the third person was foreseeable because of a specific condition of the premises, of which the owner or occupier was aware, which created a risk of wrongful conduct that the owner or occupier failed to remedy or mitigate to keep invitees safe from such wrongful conduct. See O.C.G.A § 51-3-51 (for invitees); O.C.G.A. § 51-3-52 (for licensees). There are specific differences between the requirements for a negligent security claim against a invitee versus a licensee. An invitee can show the foreseeability element through evidence of prior similar conduct on the premises or within 500 yards and must show the owner/occupier failed to exercise ordinary care. In comparison, a licensee is required to prove the foreseeability element through a particularized warning of imminent wrongful conduct and that the owner/occupier failed to exercise any care to remedy the condition which was exploited. O.C.G.A. § 51-3-55 specifically provides that owners and occupiers are not required to exercise extraordinary care nor are they required to assume responsibilities and obligations of government officials or law enforcement. According to O.C.G.A. § 51-3-57, security contractors are held to the same standards are owner/occupiers.
The following individuals are prohibited from bringing a negligent security claim: (1) trespassers; (2) persons not on the premises; (3) a tenant or guests of someone being evicted; (4) someone on the premises to commit a crime; (5) injuries sustained upon single-family residence premises; and (6) cases where the owner or occupier informed law enforcement about a particularized warning of imminent wrongful conduct.
A rebuttable presumption arises that the jury’s apportionment of fault was unreasonable if the total percentage of fault apportioned to the third party who committed wrongful conduct is less than the fault apportioned to the owner or occupier, or others who did not engage in the wrongful conduct. See O.C.G.A. § 51-3-56(3).
(2) Special Damages: Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 51-12-1.1 special damages for medical expenses are limited to the reasonable value of medically necessary care, treatment, etc. as determined by the trier of fact when considering any form of public or private health insurance, including worker’s compensation benefits, and the amounts charged for past, present, and future medical expenses regardless of whether the health insurance has been used, is used, or will be used to satisfy such charges. Letters of protection or other arrangements for treatment in exchange for a promise of payment for expenses from any judgment or settlement are now relevant and discoverable. See O.C.G.A. § 51-12-1.1(d).
NEW LAW APPLICABLE TO CAUSES OF ACTION ARISING ON OR AFTER APRIL 21, 2025
Seatbelt Evidence: O.C.G.A § 40-8-76.1 permits evidence of the failure of a party to wear a seat belt on the issues of negligence, comparative negligence, causation, assumption of the risk, and apportionment of fault.
NEW LAWS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2026
Georgia Courts Access and Consumer Protection Act: Codified at O.C.G.A. § 7-10-1, et. Seq., this Act creates regulations and a governing body for third party litigation funding requiring such companies or individuals to register; preventing litigation financiers from being involved in legal or settlement decisions; and prohibiting a litigation financier from recovering more money from the settlement/judgment than the claimant, or plaintiff, collectively.