Georgia’s sweeping tort reform law, SB 68, has fundamentally changed the landscape for personal injury cases across the state. Signed into law on April 21, 2025, by Governor Brian Kemp, this legislation affects how injury claims are filed, tried, and resolved in Georgia courtrooms. If you were hurt in an accident in Atlanta or anywhere in Georgia, understanding these changes is critical to protecting your right to fair compensation. From medical damage calculations to trial evidence rules, SB 68 introduces provisions that may directly affect your claim’s value and strategy.
If you have questions about how these changes impact your case, The Law Offices of Darwin F. Johnson can help. Call 404-521-2667 or reach out to our team today to discuss your options.
Why Georgia Passed SB 68 Tort Reform in 2025
Georgia’s civil justice system had drawn national criticism before this legislation passed. The state ranked fourth among the worst "Judicial Hellholes" in the nation, signaling concerns about unpredictable verdicts and rising litigation costs. Supporters argued reform was needed to stabilize insurance costs and create a more balanced process. Governor Kemp framed the signing of this historic tort reform as leveling the playing field in Georgia’s courtrooms.
For injured victims in the Greater Atlanta area, this law creates both challenges and opportunities. Several provisions align with model policies from the American Legislative Exchange Council, including frameworks addressing phantom damages and seatbelt evidence admissibility.
How SB 68 Changes Medical Damage Calculations
One of the most significant provisions in SB 68 involves "Truth-in-Damages" rules for medical expenses. Under previous Georgia law, the collateral source rule generally prevented defendants from presenting evidence of amounts actually paid, limiting admissible evidence to the full billed amount. Now, the reform permits both billed amounts and amounts actually paid or accepted in full satisfaction to be submitted as evidence. The jury then determines the reasonable value of past medical care based on both figures.
What "Phantom Damages" Means for Your Claim
The term "phantom damages" refers to the gap between what a medical provider bills and what an insurer actually pays. SB 68 allows juries to consider both amounts charged and amounts "actually necessary to satisfy such charges" under public or private health insurance, including workers’ compensation. Defense attorneys may argue your medical damages should reflect the lower paid amount, potentially reducing your claim’s overall value.
💡 Pro Tip: Keep detailed records of every medical bill, explanation of benefits (EOB), and out-of-pocket payment related to your injury. These documents may become critical evidence under the new Truth-in-Damages rules.
Seatbelt Evidence Is Now Admissible in Georgia Auto Accident Cases
SB 68 removes a longstanding exclusion that previously prevented defendants from showing that a plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt. Before this reform, a statutory "gag rule" barred this evidence at trial. Now, seatbelt nonuse is admissible for evaluating negligence, comparative negligence, causation, assumption of risk, or apportionment of fault. However, courts retain discretion to exclude seatbelt evidence under O.C.G.A. § 24-4-403 if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
This change matters significantly for motor vehicle accident victims in Atlanta. If you were not wearing a seatbelt at the time of a crash, the defense can now present that fact to the jury. The jury may then consider whether your injuries would have been less severe had you been buckled in, potentially reducing your damages. Understanding Georgia’s modified comparative fault rule is now more important than ever.
💡 Pro Tip: Even if you were not wearing a seatbelt, you may still recover compensation. Georgia’s comparative fault system does not automatically bar your claim, but your percentage of fault could reduce your award.
What the Jury Anchoring Ban Means for Pain and Suffering Awards
SB 68 restricts how attorneys may argue the worth or monetary value of noneconomic damages like pain and suffering. Under SB 68, attorneys may argue the monetary value of noneconomic damages only after the close of evidence and at the first opportunity to argue the issue of damages (i.e., the opening portion of closing arguments), and only if the argument is rationally related to the evidence. The statute prohibits any mention of specific dollar values for noneconomic damages during voir dire, during trial opening statements, or at any point before the close of evidence. Additionally, any specific dollar value argued in the concluding (rebuttal) portion of closing arguments must match the value first argued in the opening portion of closing arguments (the first opportunity to argue damages after the close of evidence). Violations can result in rebukes, jury instructions to disregard the argument, or mistrials.
Does SB 68 Cap Jury Awards?
No. Despite the anchoring restrictions, SB 68 does not place a cap on jury awards. Juries remain free to determine appropriate compensation for pain and suffering based on evidence. The reform limits persuasive techniques attorneys can use to influence that number. Your attorney must now build a compelling, evidence-based case for noneconomic damages.
💡 Pro Tip: Documenting the day-to-day impact of your injuries through journals, therapy records, and testimony from family members can strengthen a pain and suffering claim under the new rules.
Trial Bifurcation and How It Affects Your Personal Injury Lawyer’s Strategy
SB 68 permits parties to elect a bifurcated trial, meaning the case proceeds in phases. In the first phase, the court determines liability and fault. If the plaintiff prevails, a second phase addresses compensatory damages. A third phase may follow if punitive damages or attorney’s fees are at issue. The election must be made by written demand before entry of the pretrial order. Courts may reject bifurcation in cases where the amount in controversy is less than $150,000 or in cases alleging injuries from sexual offenses.
Bifurcation changes how your legal team prepares and presents your case. Separating liability from damages means the jury first focuses solely on who was at fault before hearing about your injuries. This can be advantageous or disadvantageous depending on your case’s specific facts.
| SB 68 Provision | What Changed | Impact on Injury Claims |
|---|---|---|
| Truth-in-Damages | Both billed and paid medical amounts now admissible | Juries may award lower medical damages |
| Seatbelt Evidence | Nonuse now admissible at trial | Defense can argue reduced damages based on seatbelt nonuse |
| Anchoring Ban | Restrictions on arguing monetary value of noneconomic damages | Pain and suffering arguments must be evidence-based |
| Trial Bifurcation | Liability, damages, and punitive damages tried in phases | Changes case presentation strategy |
| Premises Liability | Narrowed foreseeability standard | Harder to prove negligent security claims |
Premises Liability Under SB 68: A Higher Bar for Negligent Security Claims
SB 68 significantly narrows premises liability claims, particularly in negligent security cases. Under the new law, third-party wrongful conduct is considered "reasonably foreseeable" only when a premises owner had a particularized warning of imminent wrongful conduct or reasonably should have known based on actual knowledge of substantially similar prior occurrences on the premises, on adjacent premises, or within 500 yards of the property.
How Fault Is Apportioned in Negligent Security Cases
In negligent security claims, juries must now apportion fault among the property owner, the crime perpetrator, and any other responsible person. The law creates a rebuttable presumption that an apportionment of fault is unreasonable if the total percentage assigned to all perpetrators is less than the total percentage assigned to all property owners or occupiers, security contractors, and other persons who did not engage in the wrongful conduct. This makes it harder for victims of criminal acts to hold property owners primarily responsible.
💡 Pro Tip: If you were injured due to a crime on someone else’s property, gather evidence of prior criminal activity in the area. Police reports and incident logs from the property may help establish foreseeability under the new standard.
Key Steps to Protect Your Injury Claim in Georgia After SB 68
The new law raises the stakes for preparation in every Georgia personal injury case. Several provisions in SB 68 parallel ALEC model policies adopted across multiple states. Here are steps to protect yourself:
- Preserve all medical records, billing statements, and insurance payment documents from the earliest stage of treatment.
- Document everything about your accident scene, including photographs, witness contact information, and available surveillance footage.
- Be aware that Georgia’s statute of limitations for most personal injury claims is two years.
- Avoid giving recorded statements to insurance companies before consulting with an Atlanta personal injury attorney.
- Keep a written record of how your injuries affect your daily life, work, and relationships.
💡 Pro Tip: Do not assume that a settlement offer from an insurance company reflects the true value of your claim. Under SB 68, insurers may use the new damages rules to justify lower offers, so having legal guidance is essential.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Does Georgia SB 68 tort reform cap the amount a jury can award for pain and suffering?
No. SB 68 does not impose any cap on jury awards for noneconomic damages. The law restricts certain persuasive tactics attorneys may use during closing arguments, but juries retain full discretion to award appropriate compensation based on evidence.
2. Can the defense use my seatbelt nonuse against me in an Atlanta injury claim?
Yes. Under SB 68, evidence that you were not wearing a seatbelt is now admissible at trial. The jury can consider this when evaluating negligence, comparative fault, and causation. However, courts retain discretion to exclude this evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, and seatbelt nonuse alone does not bar your claim.
3. How do the new medical damages rules in SB 68 affect my personal injury case?
The Truth-in-Damages provision allows juries to see both the amounts your medical providers billed and the amounts your insurer actually paid. The jury then determines the reasonable value of your medical care. This may lead to disputes over appropriate damages, making thorough documentation essential.
4. What is trial bifurcation under SB 68, and will it apply to my case?
Trial bifurcation splits your case into separate phases for liability, compensatory damages, and potentially punitive damages. Either party can elect bifurcation by written demand before entry of the pretrial order, but a court may reject it if the amount in controversy is less than $150,000 or if the case involves injuries from sexual offenses.
5. Has SB 68 changed how premises liability works in Georgia?
Yes. SB 68 significantly narrows the foreseeability standard for negligent security claims. A property owner’s liability now generally requires a particularized warning of imminent wrongful conduct or actual knowledge of substantially similar prior criminal incidents on the premises, on adjacent premises, or within 500 yards.
Protecting Your Rights Under Georgia’s New Tort Reform Law
Georgia’s SB 68 represents the most significant change to personal injury law in the state in decades. Whether you are dealing with medical bills after a car accident, pursuing a premises liability claim, or trying to understand how these new rules affect your case, having knowledgeable legal guidance can make a meaningful difference.
The team at The Law Offices of Darwin F. Johnson is ready to help you navigate these changes. Call 404-521-2667 or contact us now to schedule a consultation and learn how Georgia’s tort reform may affect your injury claim.