Author: Matthew Haan

Relief Is (Hopefully) Coming to Georgia Businesses Via Governor Kemp’s Tort Reform Package

Posted on by Matthew Haan

Last year, I wrote about two bills in the Georgia General Assembly aimed at updating premises liability laws in our state.[1] Those bills ultimately did not pass, but new bills introduced this session indicate that lawmakers at the Capitol remain focused on refining premises liability laws. Of particular interest is Senate Bill 68.[2] SB 68, among other things, seeks to create a specific cause of action in Georgia for negligent security claims, which are currently evaluated under traditional premises liability standards. By reevaluating the standard for negligent security claims and defining when third-party conduct is “reasonably foreseeable” to a property owner, SB 68 would ultimately limit a property owner’s liability to situations where the property owner failed to keep its premises safe.

SB 68 is part of a much larger tort reform project first announced by Governor Brian Kemp at his January 2025 State of the State address. Governor Kemp has made tort reform one of his top priorities in an effort to balance the legal landscape in our state. On January 30, Governor Kemp announced his tort reform package. In addition to the premises liability changes, the governor’s plan includes:

  • Limitations on damages in personal injury actions where a plaintiff can only recover the amount of medical bills actually paid (or will actually be paid in the future), rather than recover the value of medical services charged by providers before adjustments are made by insurance companies.[3]
  • The ability to bifurcate trials so a jury must determine liability before hearing any evidence related to damages.[4]
  • Closing a loophole that previously allowed plaintiff’s counsel to double recover their attorneys’ fees and costs.[5]

Governor Kemp’s tort reform package, if passed, would also amend the Georgia Civil Practice Act by limiting a plaintiff’s ability to voluntarily dismiss a lawsuit. Currently, a plaintiff can unilaterally dismiss his lawsuit at any time before the first witness is sworn at trial. The reformed law would only allow a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss (without permission of the court) within sixty days of a defendant’s motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment, whichever occurs first, eliminating a tactic used by plaintiffs where they force defense counsel to rack up defense costs and expose defense strategies only to dismiss and refile in more favorable venues.[6] The updates to the Civil Practice Act also include changing the law to mimic the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to allow a defendant to file a motion to dismiss without having to simultaneously file an answer.[7]

The attorneys at Friend, Hudak & Harris, LLP are experienced litigators who have handled numerous cases involving the laws that are the subject of Governor Kemp’s tort reform package. If you need assistance in assessing your potential liability on a claim or how new laws in Georgia could impact your business, please contact Matthew Haan (mhaan@fh2.com; 770-771-6835) or visit FH2.com to learn more about how the attorneys at Friend, Hudak & Harris can help.

_______________________________

[1] https://www.fh2.com/potential-developments-in-premises-liability-laws/

[2] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025) (available at https://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/69756).

[3] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025), § 7.

[4] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025), § 8.

[5] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025), § 4.

[6] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025), § 3.

[7] S.B. 68, 2024–2025 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2025), § 2.

Potential Developments in Premises Liability Laws

Posted on by Matthew Haan

Georgia General Assembly Activity Indicates Potential Developments in Premises Liability Laws

Every July 1 in Georgia, new laws signed by the Governor go into effect. Although a number of new laws went into effect last month, equally important are those laws that were up for consideration but never made it to Governor Kemp’s desk for signature.

Premises liability claims in Georgia have been a hot topic in the Georgia General Assembly and in the appellate courts for a number of years, but recent developments indicate that more changes may be coming soon. Two competing proposed bills considered during the 2023-2024 Regular Session that were not enacted demonstrate this.

First, Senate Bill 186 (LC 46 0844S), titled the “Georgia Landowners Protection Act,” sought to protect landowners from liability in a premises liability action where the plaintiff’s injuries are “the result of willful, wanton, or intentionally tortious conduct of any third party,” so long as the third party is not an officer, director, employee, or agent of the landowner, unless the plaintiff establishes certain criteria related to the landowner’s knowledge and conduct at the time of the incident.[1] The bill also sought to eliminate constructive notice to a landowner when third-party criminal acts occur on a landowner’s property.[2] In other words, SB 186 would have insulated landowners from liability in seemingly the majority of third-party criminal act premises liability cases unless the plaintiff could establish that certain action (or inaction) by the landowner contributed to the incident. Senate Bill 186 did not make it to the Senate floor for a vote.

Second, House Bill 1371 (LC 49 1935S) took a much more conservative approach and proposed to protect landowners from liability in a premises liability action where the injuries arose from third-party criminal activity and the plaintiff came upon the landowner’s property “without express or implied invitation” or came onto the property to commit criminal activity.[3] O.C.G.A. § 51-3-3 already provides that landowners owe no duty of care to trespassers “except to refrain from causing a willful or wanton injury.”[4] Therefore, House Bill 1371 simply represents a clarification that already exists in Georgia law. House Bill 1371 passed in the House, but the Senate tabled it before the Bill made it to a vote in the Senate.

These two bills indicate that significant changes in Georgia premises liability law may be coming soon. In the last year, some justices on the Supreme Court of Georgia have signaled a potential review of the longstanding “plain view doctrine,” which provides that a plaintiff cannot recover for injuries caused by open and obvious, static conditions located where it is customarily found and in plain view.[5] A September 2023 concurring opinion authored by Justice Andrew Pinson questioned the current legal standard that distinguishes between static conditions and “transient foreign substances” in premises liability claims.[6]

The attorneys at Friend, Hudak & Harris, LLP have litigated numerous premises liability claims for landowners and will, therefore, continue to monitor the changing landscape governing these types of claims in Georgia. If you need assistance in assessing your potential liability on a premises liability claim, please contact Matthew Haan (mhaan@fh2.com; 770-771-6835) or visit FH2.com to learn more about how the attorneys at Friend, Hudak & Harris can help.

____________________________________

[1] S.B. 186, 2023-2024 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2023).

[2] Id.

[3] H.B. 1371, 2023-2024 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2023).

[4] O.C.G.A. § 51-3-3(b).

[5] Robinson v. Kroger Co., 268 Ga. 735, 743 (1997).

[6] Givens v. Coral Hospitality-GA, LLC, S22G1043 (September 14, 2023).