A 2010 ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court struck down a controversial law capping the amount of money an injured patient could recover from a negligent health care provider. Georgia Watch kept close tabs on developments in the case that had a far-reaching impact for all Georgians.
By imposing a $350,000 cap on jury awards, the 2005 law (SB 3) was presented as a way to reduce medical malpractice premiums and attract doctors to the state. The tangible result, however, was a limit on accountability for medical negligence and increased profit margins for large insurance providers. After a Marietta woman was permanently disfigured during a routine plastic surgery procedure, a substantial jury award was challenged under the provisions of the 2005 law. The 2010 Supreme Court ruling declared such caps unconstitutional, and overturned this aspect of SB 3.
Georgia Watch is strongly opposed to any legislation that impedes access to the courts, including measures that limit the amount an attorney can collect from a settlement. We remain firmly committed to protecting malpractice victims and fighting for greater access to the courts
Resources & Guides
Access to Civil Justice Resources
| Concern | Description | Resources |
|---|---|---|
| Arbitration | This graphic shows how mandatory arbitration impact consumers according to a 2015 study released by the CFPB | Mandatory Arbitration by the Numbers |
| Arbitration | Mandatory arbitration can take away consumers’ rights to sue in court. Find out how to protect yourself by knowing how to identify arbitration clauses in everyday contracts. | What is Mandatory Arbitration? |
