Committee advances Senate Bill 68 after hours of debate over negligent-security, medical damages and trial procedure

Rob Leverett, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Rules on Lawsuit Reform, and members of the rules committees advanced changes to Senate Bill 68 on a party-line framework after extended debate on multiple sections of the bill, including premises liability (so-called negligent security), how juries see medical bills, stays on motions to dismiss, and whether civil trials may be bifurcated.

The bill's sponsor, Senator Kennedy, told the subcommittee the substitute before members was the product of extensive negotiation and compromise and said the measure would provide predictability while preserving plaintiffs' ability to sue. "If you carefully consider the language of SB 68 and go through the exercise of applying it, the actual language of this bill, not just cherry picking words ... I want to assure the members of this committee that under the provisions of Senate Bill 68, these cases, of course, can be brought. They'll be heard. And those that have been wronged will be fairly compensated," Senator Kennedy said.

Why it matters: The substitute would change how Georgia courts treat claims against property owners for crimes by third parties, require juries to see both the hospital "rack" (list) rate and the amount actually paid or owed for medical care, alter discovery stays tied to motions to dismiss, and authorize, with limits, trial bifurcation. Supporters say the changes add predictability for businesses and insurers and address rising litigation costs; opponents say parts of the substitute could limit valid claims, delay access to discovery, or create retroactive procedural changes for pending cases.

Key provisions and debate

Negligent-security (premises liability): Section 6 of the substitute attempts to define when an owner or occupier can be liable for third-party criminal acts. The substitute narrows the statutory scope to injuries "arising from an alleged failure to keep the premises and approaches safe from the wrongful conduct of third persons" and excludes persons under the owner's direction, control or supervision (for example, employees). Sponsor remarks emphasized balancing actual knowledge and constructive knowledge and said the proposal responds to uncertainty that has grown under case law. Opponents including Representative Miller and Representative Evans pressed whether the substitute still requires plaintiffs to tie an assault or other criminal act to a specific physical condition of the premises (for example, broken lights or a broken gate). Representative Miller asked whether a claim could succeed where an owner had substantial knowledge of criminal activity but the injury "didn't have anything to do with a defect in a physical condition." Senator Kennedy replied that the bill "is trying to put additional parameters and guardrails on when someone is responsible or legally liable for negligent security. And if it's foreseeability alone, that's not enough. It requires these additional provisions." Representative Evans argued the subcommittee's language could block valid claims where foreseeability is clear but no discrete physical defect exists.

Medical damages ("phantom damages") and collateral-source evidence: The substitute's Section 7 allows juries to see both the billed or list amount (the "rack rate") and the amount that represents actual reimbursement or payment. Senator Kennedy described the change as a compromise intended to give jurors a full picture: both numbers would be before the jury so counsel could argue which number is the correct reimbursement amount. He said the provision does not cap damages or affect non-economic damages (pain and suffering).

Motions to dismiss and discovery stays: The substitute clarifies the operation of a stay of discovery when a motion to dismiss is filed. Rather than counting the stay from the filing of the motion, the substitute runs a 90-day period from the conclusion of briefing on the motion. Supporters said the change gives courts time to consider briefs; critics, including Representative Evans, said stays can stretch far longer in practice and risk letting meritorious claims languish while evidence, memories and witness availability degrade.

Bifurcation: Section 8 allows parties to seek trial bifurcation (liability, compensatory damages and punitive damages tried in phases) but instructs that, if bifurcation is used, those phases should proceed "immediately with the same judge and jury." The substitute also permits courts to deny a bifurcation election when a plaintiff is the legal guardian of a minor alleging a "covered ******* offense" and the minor would likely suffer serious psychological or emotional distress from testifying more than once, and it contains a small-case exception for controversies below $150,000.

Human trafficking carve-out: The substitute states that nothing in the article "shall be construed to limit or otherwise affect any cause of action brought pursuant to Code Section OCGA 51-1-56 or any other applicable law or theory of recovery otherwise recognized by law, including but not limited to negligence and nuisance." Senator Kennedy and others said they had broadened the language to ensure trafficking victims retain the remedies currently available under OCGA 51-1-56 and related law.

Votes at a glance

- LC 492355S (committee substitute taken in subcommittee): Subcommittee recommended "do pass" for the substitute as amended. Representative-level roll-call counts were not specified in the transcript record for the subcommittee final recommendation.

- LC 492362S (committee substitute presented in full rules committee): Rules Committee approved the substitute (motion to pass carried). Representative Evans's omnibus amendment package failed in committee; the committee substitute passed and will be available on the rules calendar.

What was decided and what was not

- The subcommittee and the full rules committee approved substitute language for SB 68 and recommended that the substitute move forward for further consideration. Formal votes recorded in the transcript show Representative Evans' omnibus amendment package was rejected in both panels; chairman-driven technical amendments in the subcommittee carried there before the subcommittee recommended the substitute.

- The committee record shows multiple issues remain contested: whether negligent-security liability should hinge on an identifiable physical condition, how long discovery stays should last while a motion to dismiss is pending, and how broadly victims of different criminal harms are treated for bifurcation protections. Representative Evans repeatedly urged changes to preserve access to discovery and to treat crime victims equally; those proposals did not pass.

Speakers and attribution

The article quotes or paraphrases only statements that appear in the meeting record and attributes direct quotes to speakers recorded in the transcript. Senator Kennedy, sponsor of SB 68, and Representative Evans are quoted directly in committee. Other participants who spoke include Rob Leverett (chair), Chairman Newton, Representative Miller and Representative Williams; questions and procedural motions are attributed in the article to those speakers where recorded.

What comes next

The rules committee substitute will be filed for the rules calendar. If later committees or the House floor adopt further changes, the text could be amended again. Several speakers warned the panel that some procedural changes could prompt litigation over retroactivity and application to pending cases.

Ending note

Members of the committee said they heard many hours of public testimony over multiple sessions and that the substitute reflects negotiated changes sought by both business and plaintiff stakeholders. Senator Kennedy thanked the committee and urged a favorable recommendation; Representative Evans said she would continue to press for language to limit extended stays and to preserve claims she said the substitute might inadvertently restrict.