The Georgia Assembly passed sweeping tort reform on Friday, March 21, 2025. Governor
Brian Kemp had announced his tort reform package on January 30, 2025. The Georgia Senate subsequently passed two bills, Senate Bill 68 on February 21, 2025, and Senate Bill 69 on
February 27, 2025. A committee substitute to Senate Bill 68 was debated at length on March 20, 2025, in the Georgia House, which eventually adopted the substitute and sent the legislation directly to the Georgia Senate. On March 21, 2025, after another lengthy debate, the Senate adopted the House version of SB 68. Senate Bill 69 remains in committee in the House.

Senate Bill 68

Senate Bill 68 aims to streamline civil litigation and clarify the handling of damages and liability in tort actions. The final bill, as passed, includes the following:

• Limit Anchoring. It introduces limitations of evidence of noneconomic damages, specifically restricting counsel from freely arguing the worth or monetary value of noneconomic damages to the jury. This tactic is known as “anchoring,” and such artificial benchmarks would no longer be permitted. Counsel would only be allowed to argue the worth or monetary value of noneconomic damages only after the close of evidence, provided that such argument is rationally related to the evidence of noneconomic damages and does not refer to objects or values having no rational connection to the facts provided by the evidence. However, if counsel is entitled to the opening and concluding arguments, then counsel shall not be allowed to argue the monetary value of noneconomic damages during counsel’s concluding argument unless counsel has argued the monetary worth on non-economic damages during such counsel’s opening argument an such counsel shall not argue a different monetary value of non-economic in concluding arguments that was argued in counsel’s opening argument.
• Bifurcation. It allows any party to bifurcate the trial into phases (without a court order), with the first phase being determination of fault, and the second phase being determination of damages. However, the court may reject an election of bifurcation by motion of a party in opposition to such bifurcation if the court determines that the plaintiff or if the plaintiff is the legal guardian of a minor, the minor was injured by an alleged sexual offense and would likely suffer serious psychological or emotional distress as a result of testifying more than once in a bifurcated proceeding, or the amount in controversary in less than $150,000.00.
• Special damages limits. It limits special damages for medical and healthcare expenses to the reasonable value of the medically necessary care, treatment, or services that plaintiff actually paid, to eliminate “phantom damages.” Evidence relevant to determine the reasonable value of the care, treatment, or services would include both the amounts charged for past, present, and future care and the amounts actually necessary to satisfy such charges pursuant to insurance contracts or the applicable governmental workers’ compensation program, regardless of whether the health insurance has been used, is used, or will be used to satisfy such charges.
• Attorney Fees. It prohibits the recovery of duplicative attorney’s fees, court costs, or expenses of litigation, and specifies that a contingent fee agreement between a party and a party’s attorney shall not be admissible as proof of the reasonableness of the fees.
• Seat belts. It allows admission of evidence related to seatbelt use and consideration of seat belt use as evidence of negligence or fault.
• “Negligent Security.” Senate Bill 68 also creates a “negligent security” cause of action, exclusive remedies for such cause of action, including apportionment of damages, and limits the liability of security contractors to the same extent as owners or occupiers in “negligent security” actions.

The bill makes several procedural changes including:

• Amending the timing of answers when a Motion for More Definitive Statement is filed;
• Staying discovery when a motion to dismiss has been filed; and
• Revises when a plaintiff may file a voluntary dismissal. Requiring that such a dismissal must take place in writing before the sixtieth day following the date the opposing party either serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, whichever is sooner. Current law permits such voluntary dismissals any time before the first witness is sworn. This aims to stop plaintiffs from dismissing their case, only to re-file it in hopes of obtaining a more favorable judge once the defense has already invested resources in trial preparation and trial.

Senate Bill 69

Senate Bill 69 known at the “Georgia Courts Access and Consumer Protection Act” aims to regulate third-party funding litigation. This bill requires litigation financiers to register with the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance and sets out the requirements to the filings. It also prohibits the litigation financiers from making any decisions with respect to the course of any civil actions. It further prohibits litigation financiers affiliated with any foreign person, foreign principal, or sovereign wealth fund of a foreign government or foreign nongovernment person designated by the United States Secretary of Commerce as a foreign adversary pursuant to 15 C.F.R Section 14. The bill lays out very specific language that much be contained in every litigation financing contract and makes such litigation financing agreements discoverable.