GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS


Tort Reform Arrives in Georgia


JON HOIN GDA Senior Health Policy Manager


Recent malpractice cases, including a $50,000,000 verdict against a dentist, made policymakers sit up and take notice. Following the passage of a 2024 bill, the Data Analysis for Tort Reform Act, and recommendations from the Offi ce of Commissioner of Insurance and Safety Fire, Governor Kemp’s offi ce prioritized tort reform in the 2025 session. With support from a broad coalition of businesses, Georgia’s General Assembly passed Senate Bill 68 and Senate Bill 69. Despite some uncertainty, historical trends suggest that dentists can expect some relief from rising malpractice premiums.


What is a


tort anyway


? 16 | Sept 2025


“A tort is an act or omission that gives rise to injury or harm to another and amounts to a civil wrong for which courts impose liability. In the context of torts, “injury” describes the invasion of any legal right, whereas “harm” describes a loss or detriment that 1


 themselves subject to a lawsuit for malpractice. In  1. A professional duty owed to the patient (dentist/patient relationship),


2. A breach of such duty, 3. Injury as a result of the breach, 4. And damages.2


Relief off ered by a court may include both economic damages, expenses incurred as a result of negligence, and noneconomic damages, pain and suff ering or diminished quality of life. Variation in amounts awarded at trial can be high thanks to a variety of factors.3 Georgia’s judicial environment has


gained national attention, topping the list of the American Tort Reform Association’s list of “Judicial Hellholes” in 2023 and staying in their top fi ve the following year. Georgia made the list due in part to several “nuclear verdicts” and popular critiques


of certain procedural rules.4 Proponents


of tort reform typically cite a desire to reduce the number of frivolous lawsuits arising from misaligned procedures and incentives.5


Opponents typically argue that


reforms like the ones passed in Georgia have not been shown to lower insurance premiums and may make it diffi cult for plaintiff s to win their cases.5


Eff ects of Torts on Health Care Services Torts may have several eff ects on how healthcare is provided in a given place. T ey have implications for quality of care, provider supply, and the practice of


“defensive medicine.”6,7 Research into


how diff ering tort laws aff ect dentists is rare, but at least one paper does suggest that state laws modestly aff ect the way dentists practice.8


Much of the


existing research focuses on physicians, with special emphasis on OBGYNs.7,9 Tort reform, particularly the kind that tempers amounts awarded to plaintiff s and reduces insurance companies’ losses, can potentially alter provider behavior, reducing unnecessary care or increasing patient load, and reduce malpractice premiums, but the fact of the matter is that untangling the eff ects of reforms is complicated.6–10 T e eff ects of diff erent reforms depend


on a whole host of factors. Reforms seen as temporary or unlikely to go into eff ect will not rock the boat, and business proceeds as usual.10


Alternatively, diff erent reforms


may elicit diff erent responses from various actors. Legal factors related to reduced award size have been positively associated with the frequency of dental visits per week.8


Caps on noneconomic damages


may be associated with a decrease in health care utilization and spending as well as an increase in physician supply.6,7 Alternatively, some research has shown that reforms like Texas’s 2003 package had little to no impact on the cost of medical care paid for by private health insurers.9 When considering how individual actors


experience the benefi ts of any reform, it is helpful to lay out a roadmap and to consider the mechanics involved. Tort reform’s infl uence begins in the courtroom. Oſt en, changes are procedural, rearranging processes to reduce the cost of conducting a trial. Other reforms may directly address damages by imposing caps or other limiting factors that reduce the eventual payout of a given lawsuit. Malpractice insurers see the benefi ts of reforms fi rst since they are close to the action. Purchasers of insurance then see benefi ts


of reforms through premium reductions; however, insurers may not necessarily pass along the entirety of their savings. Likewise, the benefi ts to patients would depend on the provider’s decisions. As one goes further down the chain, savings


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60