The Georgia Tort Reform Act--Changes Made by SB68 and Their Effective Dates

Signing Ceremony for the Georgia Tort Reform Act at the Georgia State Capitol / Image by the Office of the Governor

On April 21, 2025, Governor Kemp signed the much-anticipated SB 68 and SB 69 into law as the Georgia Tort Reform Act. The new law codifying SB 68 contains 8 sections updating the rules of evidence, filing, discovery, and trials in personal injury cases in Georgia courts. Most of the provisions of the new statute are retroactive.  Sections 6 and 7 of the Act, however, are only applicable to causes of action arising on or after April 21, 2025.

The following sections apply retroactively and are therefore applicable to all currently pending tort cases:

Section 1 (Non-economic Damages - revision to OCGA §9-10-184). The Act’s first section limits how and when a party can argue for noneconomic damages before a jury. Noneconomic damages include claims for pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium, etc. To address concerns about arbitrary dollar amounts being used to seek “nuclear” verdicts, this section requires that any evidence concerning noneconomic damages must be tied to actual evidence of a plaintiff’s pain and suffering.

Section 2 (Motion practice - revision to OCGA §9-11-12). This section makes several changes to civil filing procedures. When a defendant files a motion as its first pleading (e.g. a motion to dismiss or motion for more definite statement), the deadline for a defendant to file an answer is postponed until 15 days after the court rules on that motion. Discovery is also put on hold while any pre-answer motion is pending. However, if a defendant files an answer before the court rules on defendant’s motion, the stay on discovery shall immediately terminate.

Section 3 (Limits on Dismissals - revision to OCGA §9-11-41). A plaintiff is still permitted to unilaterally dismiss claims, but they must do so within 60 days of the defendant(s) filing an answer. If a plaintiff wants to dismiss a claim after that time, it must be with the consent of all parties in the lawsuit or upon an order of the court for terms it deems proper. A dismissal of this type will typically be considered “without prejudice,” meaning it is not a dismissal based on the merits of the claims.

Section 4 (Attorney’s Fees - revision to OCGA §9-15-16). A party can only recover attorney’s fees and costs of litigation once based on another party’s statutory violation, even if more than one statute entitles them to the recovery. Additionally, an agreement of a contingency fee is not allowed to be used as evidence when seeking attorney’s fees.

Section 5 (Admissibility of Seatbelt Evidence - revision to OCGA §40-8-76). Evidence of whether a party was wearing a seatbelt can now be admitted in cases involving motor vehicle accidents. This change is long overdue and will inure to the benefit of many of our clients. Defendants in motor vehicle collisions will now be able to tell the jury that a plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt and consequently, was injured more severely than if they had chosen to wear a seatbelt. However, seatbelt evidence cannot be used by insurance companies to cancel coverage or increase rates.

Section 8 (Bifurcation/Trifurcation - creating new code section OCGA §51-12-15). In tort cases, any party can now elect to have a trial split into phases: one phase determining fault, a second phase determining the amount of damages to be awarded to compensate a plaintiff for harm, and a third phase (if applicable) determining the amount of damages to be awarded to punish a defendant and/or allow a party to recover attorney’s fees and costs of litigation. This process is also known as bifurcation (a two-phase trial) or trifurcation (a three-phase trial), and all phases occur back-to-back with the same judge and jury. This new section also defines a couple exceptions that a party can raise to object to bifurcation/trifurcation.

The following sections of the Tort Reform Act only apply to causes of action arising on or after April 21, 2025, the day the Governor signed the Act into law:

Section 6 (Negligent Security - creating new code sections OCGA §51-3-50 through §51-3-57). This statute contains an entirely new Article to regulate negligent security claims. The new law now provides the exclusive remedy in the majority, but not quite all, of the premises liability claims for negligent security where plaintiffs allege injuries caused by the wrongful act of a third party in cases filed against a premises owner, occupier, or security contractor. However, if the wrongful act was committed by an employee, or by another person “under the direction, control, or supervision” of an owner, occupier, or security contractor, then a plaintiff’s cause of action will still arise under pre-existing premises liability law.

Furthermore, under the old law, a duty was triggered when a third-party’s criminal actions were “reasonably foreseeable.” That is still the case, but the new statute narrows the definition to be more favorable to property owners and occupiers. This new section also details how to apportion fault, specifying that unless all third-party wrongdoers are more than 50% at fault, the court must set aside the verdict and order a retrial.

Section 7 (Medical Bills - creating new code section OCGA §51-12-1.1). In some tort actions, evidence of a plaintiff’s health insurance, including workers’ compensation benefits, may now be admissible at trial.  This evidence will serve to determine the “reasonable value” of medically necessary treatment (i.e., a comparison of the amounts charged by a plaintiff’s medical providers and the amounts actually paid). This will allow our clients to reduce inflated awards for medical expenses, commonly known as “phantom damages.”

The Georgia Tort Reform Act is certain to have an immediate impact on personal injury cases generally, which will only increase as the changes to the negligent security paradigm and limitation on phantom damages begin to take effect as well.  The plaintiffs’ Bar has already launched constitutional challenges to seatbelt admissibility and others are sure to follow.  Georgia judges will certainly have their hands full as these cases start to percolate through our courts. For now, however, defendants can enjoy the more level playing field provided by the new Georgia Tort Reform Act.

You can read the full text of SB68 here.