Georgia Tort Reform Law Means New Hurdles for Injured People and Attorneys

On April 21, 2025, Georgia lawmakers enacted sweeping tort reform through Senate Bills 68 and 69, signaling a significant recalibration of the state’s civil litigation framework. While proponents claim these reforms will reduce “frivolous lawsuits” and lower insurance costs, the practical effect is a substantial restriction in injured plaintiffs’ ability to recover fair compensation, particularly in premises liability and motor vehicle accident cases. These reforms arrive amid a climate of increasing claim denials and heightened insurance scrutiny.

The tort reform law significantly alters the balance of power in civil litigation. Though framed as a cost-control measure, it reduces jury discretion, imposes stricter liability standards, and introduces procedural hurdles like bifurcated trials. These changes not only burden plaintiffs and their attorneys but also demand greater legal precision to achieve fair outcomes in an increasingly defendant-friendly system.

Impact on Injured Plaintiffs

The law introduces changes that could limit compensation for injured plaintiffs:

• Stricter Liability Standards: Negligent security cases now require proof of prior wrongful conduct within 500 yards of the property. This may reduce successful claims against property owners in cases like assaults or slip-and-falls.
• Lower Damage Awards: Evidence of actual medical costs paid (not billed) and bans on “anchoring” pain and suffering damages (e.g., referencing unrelated high figures) could lead to smaller awards.
• Procedural Challenges: Bifurcated trials (separating liability and damages) and allowing seatbelt evidence in auto cases may reduce payouts, as non-use of seatbelts could mitigate damages.
• Funding Restrictions: Limits on third-party litigation funding and transparency requirements may hinder plaintiffs’ ability to finance lawsuits, potentially reducing access to justice.

These reforms may lower the volume of litigation, but they do so by narrowing access to justice, not by resolving the root causes of injury or overburdened courts.

Impact on Plaintiffs’ Attorneys

The law creates challenges for attorneys representing plaintiffs:

• Fewer Cases: Stricter liability and damage rules may discourage taking on cases with lower potential payouts, especially in negligent security or smaller claims.
• Increased Complexity: Bifurcated trials, new dismissal motion timelines, and restrictions on voluntary dismissals increase litigation costs and time.
• Reduced Attorney Fees: Eliminating double recovery of attorney fees and regulating litigation funding could lower earnings.
• Strategic Shifts: Attorneys may need to focus on high-value cases and adapt to new evidentiary rules, such as seatbelt evidence, requiring changes in case selection and preparation.
• Automatic Stay of Discovery: When a defendant files a motion to dismiss, discovery is automatically stayed for 90 days. This provision can delay the gathering of evidence, potentially impacting the plaintiff’s ability to build a strong case promptly.
• Limitations on Damage Arguments: Attorneys must ensure that any suggested amounts for non-economic damages are substantiated by trial evidence, restricting the use of persuasive analogies or comparisons during closing arguments.

The Georgia legislative changes are problematic because personal injuries remain a major public health concern, with approximately 31 million Americans requiring medical treatment annually for general injuries, as reported by the National Center for Health Statistics. Of these, about 2 million cases are severe enough to require hospitalization, underscoring the burden on healthcare systems. The National Safety Council further notes that preventable injuries, which include a significant portion of personal injuries, had a death rate of 66.5 per 100,000 population in 2022, marking a 0.6% increase from 2021 and a 100% increase since 1992.

This escalation highlights the growing challenge of injury prevention, with unintentional injuries ranking as the third leading cause of death, behind heart disease and cancer, and contributing to nearly 175,000 deaths each year. But to many, the bigger challenge is the continuous denial of claims by insurance companies, mainly due to unintended errors in filings by individuals, as well as disputed liability.

Three key factors drive settlements and denials.

1. Establishing Clear Liability

Among many other factors, one of the major determinants of the outcome of any claim is how well liability is established. Many states, including Georgia, apply the comparative negligence doctrine to reduce a claimant’s recovery by their percentage of fault and bar recovery entirely if they are more than 50% responsible.

Utilizing a broad approach to liability by identifying all potential defendants is critical in personal injury litigation, as it significantly expands the scope and potential recovery of a claim. In a tire failure case, for example, a thorough investigation might target not only the tire manufacturer for a defective product but also the dealership that failed to address a recall during routine maintenance, thereby increasing the claim’s financial and legal reach.

This strategy demands early and exhaustive investigation to uncover less-obvious culpable parties, such as municipalities responsible for poorly designed roads, maintenance companies in premises liability cases, or third-party contractors whose negligence played a role in the incident.

2. Strength and Quality of Evidence

Even when liability is clearly established in a case, without robust evidence to support duty, breach, causation and damages, insurance adjusters can still deny a claim. A robust evidentiary foundation is non-negotiable. Medical records, police reports, witness statements, and technological data, such as vehicle event data recorders, are essential to substantiate claims.

One recent case used Fitbit data to illustrate a client’s disrupted sleep patterns post-injury, strengthening the claim’s credibility. It is critical to avoid gaps in medical treatment, as insurers exploit these to argue injuries are not severe, a tactic that can be countered with meticulous documentation of injuries and medical treatments.

3. Accurate Assessment of Economic Damages

Poor assessment of economic and non-economic damages means that many claim amounts are drastically reduced. Economic damages such as medical expenses, lost wages, and future care costs require precise calculation to ensure fair compensation.

There is a need for comprehensive documentation, including projections of long-term expenses, such as ongoing therapy or lost earning capacity. Employing financial experts to model these costs accurately can be beneficial, a step often overlooked in less experienced practices.

Matt Wetherington is founder of Wetherington Law Firm in Atlanta, specializing in personal injury and wrongful death law.

Topics Georgia