Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Right To Jury Trial In Landmark Wrongful Death Case: Clark V. Leigh

On June 16, 2026, the Supreme Court of Georgia issued a major decision in Clark v. Leigh (2026 WL 1728636) that strengthens one of the most fundamental protections in our justice system: the right to a jury trial.

In a unanimous opinion authored by Chief Justice Peterson, the Court reaffirmed its 2010 ruling in Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt and made clear that Georgia’s constitutional guarantee of trial by jury includes a substantive component. The legislature cannot invade that right by capping damages that a jury has the power to award.

This ruling has profound implications for wrongful death cases across Georgia. It protects the ability of injured patients and grieving families to receive the full compensation a jury determines is fair — without arbitrary legislative caps stripping away the jury’s verdict.

As an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has represented countless victims of negligence and loved ones in Wrongful Death cases, I view Clark v. Leigh as a powerful victory for Georgians who have suffered life-altering harm at the hands of the responsible parties.

The Tragic Facts Behind The Case

In May 2019, April S. Clark underwent surgery to remove an ovarian cyst. During the procedure, her bowel was perforated. She was then under the post-operative care of Dr. Thomas Leigh, Dr. William Shirley, and OB/GYN Specialists, LLP.

Complications followed. Ms. Clark ultimately died on June 27, 2019.

Her husband, Charles Clark, and her daughter (as administrator of the estate) filed suit for wrongful death, conscious pain and suffering, and medical expenses. After a jury trial in Bibb County State Court in July 2024, the jury returned a verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor:

• $29,250,000 for the full value of April Clark’s life (wrongful death)
• $2,500,000 for her conscious pain and suffering
• $1,715,176 for medical expenses

The defendants later moved to reduce the verdict using Georgia’s noneconomic damages cap statute, OCGA § 51-13-1(b), which generally limits noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases (including wrongful death) to $350,000 per claimant.

The trial court applied the cap to the wrongful death award, slashing the $29.25 million verdict down to $350,000. The pain and suffering and medical expense awards were left intact.

The plaintiffs appealed. The defendants cross-appealed on other grounds.

The Supreme Court’s Ruling: A Strong Reaffirmation Of The Jury Trial Right

The Georgia Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s reduction of the verdict. In doing so, the Court delivered several important holdings:

1. The defendants did not waive their right to assert the damages cap.
   The Court held that the doctors could raise the statutory cap for the first time in post-trial motions. The cap is not an affirmative defense that must be pled in the pretrial order.

2. The Court firmly adhered to Nestlehutt under principles of stare decisis.
   This is the heart of the decision. In Nestlehutt (2010), the Court held that Georgia’s constitutional right to trial by jury (Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XI(a)) prevents the legislature from capping noneconomic damages (pain and suffering and loss of consortium) in medical malpractice cases. The right includes not just the procedural right to have a jury decide facts, but a substantive right to have the jury’s determination of damages given legal effect.

The defendants in Clark v. Leigh asked the Court to overrule Nestlehutt, arguing that the jury trial right is purely procedural. The Supreme Court declined.

Chief Justice Peterson’s opinion contains a thorough stare decisis analysis. The Court explained that Nestlehutt was not “clearly or obviously wrong.” History and precedent support the view that the right to trial by jury has substantive protections. The Court reviewed centuries of Georgia precedent, English common law, and statements from the founding generation (including John Adams and Thomas Jefferson) emphasizing the jury’s role as a bulwark against arbitrary power.

The Court also preserved Nestlehutt’s claim- and remedy-specific framework. To determine whether the jury trial right applies, courts look at:

• Whether the type of claim existed and was tried by jury in Georgia (or under common law) as of the relevant historical date (at minimum, the common law as adopted in 1776); and
• Whether the specific damages awarded were the type juries historically determined.

3. The statutory cap cannot be applied here without violating the Constitution or rewriting the Constitution.
   This is the practical takeaway. OCGA § 51-13-1(b) creates a single, aggregate cap: it combines all noneconomic damages awarded in the case (pain and suffering + wrongful death “full value of life” damages) into one “total amount recoverable” and limits that total to $350,000.

Because the jury awarded $2.5 million in pain and suffering damages — which Nestlehutt protects from capping — applying the aggregate cap would necessarily reduce damages the Constitution says a jury must be allowed to award in full. The statute provides no mechanism to cap only the wrongful death portion while leaving the protected pain and suffering award untouched.

The Court refused to rewrite the statute to make it work. Under separation of powers, that job belongs to the General Assembly, not the judiciary.

4. Other issues were resolved in favor of upholding the verdict structure.
   The Court rejected challenges to the verdict form, the jury charge on aggravation of a preexisting condition (the initial bowel perforation could be aggravated by later negligence), and the trial court’s handling of the general grounds for new trial.

The case was remanded for the trial court to address one remaining issue: whether the wrongful death award was excessive.

Why Clark V. Leigh Matters For Injury Victims In Georgia

This decision sends a clear message:

• Juries matter. When a Georgia jury hears the evidence in a medical malpractice or wrongful death case and determines that significant noneconomic damages are warranted, the legislature cannot simply override that determination with a one-size-fits-all cap that would also gut protected damages.
• Stare decisis protects constitutional rights. The Court showed strong respect for precedent. Once a constitutional interpretation has been settled — especially one protecting individual rights against legislative overreach — it will not be lightly discarded simply because a new Court might reach a different policy result.
• Big verdicts in serious cases are protected. In cases involving catastrophic injury or death caused by medical negligence, juries can award substantial compensation for pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and the full value of life without fear that a statutory cap will automatically slash the award.

This ruling does not eliminate all damages caps in Georgia. It specifically protects noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases where the jury trial right attaches (pain and suffering in the estate’s claim here). The Court left open whether a cap could ever constitutionally apply to a pure wrongful death verdict with no protected damages mixed in.

What This Means If You Or A Loved One Has Been Harmed By Negligence

If you are considering a medical malpractice or wrongful death claim in Georgia, Clark v. Leigh is excellent news. It reinforces that you have the right to present your case to a jury of your peers and have that jury — not the legislature — decide the full measure of your damages.

These cases are complex. They require experienced counsel who understands medicine, Georgia law, and how to maximize recovery while protecting the jury’s verdict on appeal.

At my firm, we have helped families across Atlanta and throughout Georgia hold negligent doctors, hospitals, and healthcare providers accountable. We know how devastating medical errors can be — and we fight aggressively to secure the compensation our clients deserve.

Have You Or A Family Member Suffered Serious Injury Or Death Due To Medical Negligence?

You may be entitled to substantial compensation for medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering, and the full value of a loved one’s life. The right to have a jury decide those damages is now stronger than ever thanks to Clark v. Leigh.

Contact Atlanta personal injury lawyer George Creal today for a free, confidential consultation. We will review your case, explain your rights, and help you understand your options under Georgia law.

Call or text: (770) 961-5511
Visit: www.georgialawyer.com

We serve clients throughout the Atlanta metro area and across the state of Georgia. There is no fee unless we recover money for you.

The right to trial by jury is not just a legal technicality — it is a cornerstone of justice. The Georgia Supreme Court has once again made clear that it will remain inviolate.