Tort Reform Hits Georgia: Senate Bill 68 Passes House, Threatens Victims’ Rights

Yesterday, March 20, 2025, the Georgia House of Representatives narrowly passed Senate Bill 68 by a vote of 91-82, bringing Governor Brian Kemp’s top legislative priority a sweeping tort reform package one step closer to becoming law. Touted by its supporters as a “common-sense” fix to curb “frivolous lawsuits” and stabilize insurance costs, this bill is anything but a win for everyday Georgians. As a personal injury lawyer with over 25 years of experience fighting for the rights of the injured, I see SB 68 for what it truly is: a corporate giveaway that undermines accountability and makes it harder for victims to seek justice.

SB 68, which cleared the Georgia Senate last month and now heads back to the Senate for final approval of House amendments, introduces a raft of changes to Georgia’s civil justice system. Key provisions include:

Governor Kemp and House Speaker Jon Burns have praised SB 68 as a way to “balance the scales of justice” and protect businesses from “runaway” jury awards. But let’s cut through the spin: this bill doesn’t protect Georgians it protects corporations and insurance companies at the expense of those harmed by negligence.

Proponents claim SB 68 will lower insurance premiums for businesses and consumers. Where’s the evidence? States like Florida, which passed similar tort reforms, have seen insurance rates rise, not fall, while victims struggle to hold wrongdoers accountable. In Georgia, the American Tort Reform Foundation has labeled us a “Judicial Hellhole” due to high verdicts, but those verdicts often reflect real harm like the $1.7 billion punitive award in 2022 that punished egregious corporate misconduct. SB 68 doesn’t address root causes like insurance industry practices; it just silences the courthouse as a check on negligence.

Take premises liability, for example. If a woman is assaulted in an apartment complex stairwell due to broken locks the landlord ignored, SB 68 makes it nearly impossible to prove the landlord’s negligence unless there was a “particularized warning” or a “known physical condition” exploited by the attacker. This isn’t fairness it’s a free pass for property owners to skimp on safety.

The seat belt provision is another red herring. While insurance companies can’t raise rates based on non-use, juries can now blame victims for their injuries, even if a drunk driver plows into them. As a DUI lawyer, I’ve seen how insurance companies twist facts to dodge payouts SB 68 hands them another tool to do just that.

The House vote was razor-thin, with 91 in favor and 82 against. Three Democrats crossed party lines to support the bill, while eight Republicans broke ranks to oppose it a rare bipartisan fracture reflecting the bill’s divisive nature. Survivors of sexual abuse and assault protested at the Capitol, decrying the bill’s failure to fully protect all crime victims. An amendment carved out exceptions for sex trafficking victims, but as Rep. Stacey Evans (D-Atlanta) pointed out, “What about a rape victim? What about a victim of sexual assault?” The bill’s patchwork approach leaves many Georgians out in the cold.

SB 68 now returns to the Senate to reconcile House amendments. If approved, it lands on Governor Kemp’s desk, where he’s all but guaranteed to sign it, having championed tort reform as his “top priority” for 2025. For injured Georgians, the clock is ticking. Once this becomes law, your ability to seek full compensation for medical bills, lost wages, and pain could shrink dramatically.

At my firm, we’ve spent decades holding negligent parties accountable whether it’s a drunk driver, a careless business, or an insurer denying a fair claim. SB 68 doesn’t scare us; it fuels us. We’ll keep fighting smarter and harder to navigate these new hurdles and get justice for our clients. If you’ve been injured, don’t let this bill silence you. Call us today because your rights still matter, even if the legislature thinks otherwise.

George Creal is a trial lawyer based in Atlanta, specializing in Personal Injury and DUI Defense. With a track record of taking on tough cases, he’s committed to protecting Georgians’ rights in and out of the courtroom.

Summary Of Senate Bill 68 Provisions

1. Civil Practice Reforms (Title 9 Amendments)

• Noneconomic Damages (O.C.G.A. § 9-10-184):
  • Defines “economic damages” (e.g., medical expenses, lost wages) and “noneconomic damages” (e.g., pain and suffering, emotional distress).
  • Prohibits lawyers from suggesting specific monetary amounts or ranges for noneconomic damages to juries during trial, except after evidence closes and only if rationally tied to evidence. This limits “anchoring” arguments.
  • Violations trigger remedial measures (e.g., jury instructions) or juror excusal during voir dire.
• Answer And Discovery Timing (O.C.G.A. § 9-11-12):
  • Defendants must answer within 30 days of summons unless altered by a motion (e.g., 15 days after a denied motion to dismiss or a more definite statement).
  • Discovery is stayed for 90 days if a motion to dismiss is filed, extendable for good cause, with limited discovery allowed for jurisdictional or party-identification issues.
• Voluntary Dismissals (O.C.G.A. § 9-11-41):
  • Plaintiffs can dismiss actions without court order before the 60th day after an answer or by stipulation. A second dismissal of the same claim is an adjudication on the merits.
  • Court-ordered dismissals require terms set by the judge and are typically without prejudice unless stated otherwise.
• Attorney’s Fees And Costs (O.C.G.A. § 9-15-16):
  • Prevents double recovery of attorney’s fees, court costs, or litigation expenses under multiple statutes unless explicitly allowed.
  • Contingent fee agreements are inadmissible to prove fee reasonableness.

2. Motor Vehicle Evidence (Title 40 Amendments)

• Seat Belt Use (O.C.G.A. § 40-8-76.1):
  • Allows evidence of seat belt non-use in civil actions to assess negligence, causation, or damages, reversing prior law that barred such evidence.
  • Still prohibits insurers from canceling coverage or raising rates based on seat belt non-use.

3. Tort Liability Changes (Title 51 Amendments)

• Negligent Security (New Article 5, O.C.G.A. §§ 51-3-50 to 51-3-57):
  • Defines “negligent security” as claims against property owners or security contractors for injuries from third-party wrongful conduct (e.g., crimes).
  • Invitees: Liability requires proving foreseeability (via specific warnings or prior similar incidents), a known physical condition exploited by the third party, and failure to exercise ordinary care.
  • Licensees: Higher bar requires willful/wanton failure to act after a specific warning of imminent danger.
  • Excludes liability for trespassers, off-premises injuries, tenant-related crimes during eviction, single-family residences, or felony-committing invitees/licensees (except trafficking victims).
  • Exclusive remedy for negligent security claims, with exceptions for trafficking-related actions (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-56).
  • Fault apportionment under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33 must reasonably assign blame to third parties, with retrial if inadequate.
• Medical Damages (O.C.G.A. § 51-12-11):
  • Limits special damages for medical expenses to “reasonable value” of necessary care, determined by the trier of fact.
  • Allows evidence of both billed and paid amounts (via insurance or otherwise) but abrogates the collateral source rule to permit this. Letters of protection and related arrangements are discoverable.
  • If a plaintiff in a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit has public or private health insurance, including workers’ compensation, evidence to determine the “reasonable value” of necessary medical care must include both the amounts billed for past, present, or future medical expenses and the amounts actually required to settle those charges under the insurance or workers’ compensation terms, regardless of whether the insurance was, is, or will be used to pay them.
• Bifurcated Trials (O.C.G.A. § 51-12-15):
  • Parties can request separate trial phases: (1) fault/apportionment, (2) compensatory damages, and (3) punitive damages or fees, if applicable.
  • Courts can deny bifurcation if it causes serious distress (e.g., sexual offense victims) or if the amount in controversy is under $150,000.

4. Effective Date And Applicability (Section 9)

• Effective upon Governor’s approval or automatic enactment.
• Negligent security and medical damages provisions apply only to causes of action arising on or after the effective date; other provisions apply to pending actions unless unconstitutional.

5. Repeal Of Conflicting Laws (Section 10)

• Repeals all laws conflicting with SB 68.

Key Takeaways