Gov. Brian Kemp says pushing through new limits on lawsuits in Georgia is his top priority for the 2025 legislative session. He’s seen here addressing the state’s business community earlier this month. Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder
After weeks of suspense, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp’s proposal to overhaul Georgia’s legal landscape is finally here.
At a jam-packed press conference Thursday, Kemp gathered state lawmakers and business leaders at Georgia’s state Capitol to introduce policies he says are aimed at reducing insurance prices for businesses and everyday consumers alike.
“If your neighborhood doesn’t have a grocery store, if your hometown and surrounding counties don’t have an OB/GYN, if the local family-owned restaurant is forced to raise prices again and again or go out of business altogether, if the child care facility your son or daughter attends has to close its doors, if your car insurance premium goes up just like it did last year, those are real jobs potentially gone forever,” Kemp said. “Those are real costs that every single Georgian has to pay.”
Proponents of overhauling Georgia’s legal landscape, sometimes referred to as “tort reform,” say large jury awards are driving up insurance costs across the state. They often cite a 2024 American Tort Reform Foundation ranking that listed Georgia as one of the top five “judicial hellholes” in the country. A recent report from Insurance Commissioner John King echoed those findings, arguing that an increase in claims and large jury verdicts was resulting in higher insurance rates for Georgia businesses.
Kemp has touted the issue as his key priority for the 2025 legislative session, threatening to reconvene the state legislature for a special session if his proposed overhauls do not pass by the end of the session in early April. However, until now he had not released any specific policy proposals, garnering criticism from Democrats.
At Thursday’s press conference, Kemp outlined a nine-pronged approach aimed at limiting lawsuit awards, divided into two pieces of legislation. Senate Bill 68, sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem John F. Kennedy, a Macon Republican, would tackle the majority of Kemp’s plans, including measures that would limit owners’ liability for injuries that occur on their property, prevent plaintiffs’ lawyers from suggesting a monetary value to compensate for pain and suffering, and enable trials to be bifurcated, or split into multiple stages so that juries can determine liability and damages separately.
Senate Bill 69, also authored by Kennedy, would increase regulations on third-party sources of funding for lawsuits, requiring any third-party entities to be registered with the Department of Banking and Finance and limiting their ability to exert influence over the plaintiffs’ legal decisions, such as when and how plaintiffs settle a case. It also prevents foreign governments and adversaries from becoming litigation financiers.
The two bills notably exclude any explicit caps on the damages that can be awarded to plaintiffs who file lawsuits. A previous legislative attempt to limit jury payouts passed in 2005 but was struck down by the Georgia Supreme Court five years later.
However, the legislation is still likely to face pushback from both Democrats and trial lawyers, who argue that factors other than jury awards may be driving rising insurance premiums.
“There are very real issues that Georgians face when it comes to insurance,” said Rep. Tanya Miller, an Atlanta Democrat. “We hear about them all the time: Denied claims, canceled policies, rising premiums. We can and should do something about these issues.
“The truth is, we’re just being asked to take the insurance industry’s word for it that so-called ‘frivolous lawsuits’ drive up rates. There is no transparency in how they set their rates, and they are not required to provide proof that restricting laws will lower premiums,” she added.
Proponents of the proposed changes, including the Georgia Chamber of Commerce and other industry groups, argue they will create more balance between plaintiffs and defendants in Georgia’s court system, establishing an environment that would entice more insurance companies to provide coverage throughout the state. Kyle Wingfield, the president and CEO of the conservative-leaning Georgia Public Policy Foundation, echoed those sentiments.
“It genuinely seems that they’re not trying to just clamp down on lawsuits generally,” Wingfield said. “They’re trying to address some very specific problems with civil cases and I think, bring it back into balance.”
But members of the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association (GTLA) were skeptical of the policy proposals, with former state Rep. Matthew Wilson, an Atlanta-based personal injury lawyer and member of the GTLA’s executive committee calling efforts to limit damages awarded for medical bills “clear non-starters.”
“The bottom line is that it shifts the costs of the wrongdoing from the bad actors who did the wrongdoing to the victims — the innocent parties — who just so happen to have insurance,” he said.
Wilson also argued that Kemp’s office had not taken trial lawyers’ views into account during its data collection process.
“That trial lawyers and the plaintiffs’ bar, who represent Georgia consumers, were the one stakeholder in this issue that were shut out from that process,” said former state Rep. Matthew Wilson, a personal injury lawyer in Atlanta and member of the GTLA’s executive committee. “But that notwithstanding, we have been working with the governor’s team to provide data to show why this effort is misguided and why we need to be focused on the insurance companies, because they are the ones that are raising the premiums.”
Advocates on both sides of the issue say they will need time to digest the bills before taking any firm stances. But efforts to limit third-party lawsuit financing, in particular, may be an area in which disparate groups can find some common ground. Third-party entities seeking to profit off of personal injury settlements have come under scrutiny nationwide, with states like Indiana, Louisiana and West Virginia all opting to pass new transparency regulations.
For desperate plaintiffs, financing offers from third-party entities can be enticing, Atlanta-based attorney and political analyst Madeline Summerville said.
“These third-party lenders come along and say, ‘hey, we’ll give you the money that you need for now,’ but then they end up doubling it by the end, and so it’s very predatory in a lot of ways,” Summerville said. “I think you would get bipartisan support on those kinds of measures for sure.”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.