SB 68 and Non-Economic Damages: Examining the Impact on Injury Claims

The current version of SB 68, part of Governor Kemp’s proposed changes to the tort system in Georgia, contains this provision on non-economic damages:

Are you wondering what it means to “argue the worth or monetary value of non-economic damages”? Or what it means to “elicit any testimony” or “make reference to” an amount or range of amounts for non-economic damages”?

On its face, this proposed statute prevents a party from asking for an amount for non-economic damages.

But it doesn’t stop there.

The proposed statute is so broad, and vague, that it could arguably prevent a party from simply arguing about non-economic damages at all because by doing so they are arguing their worth or monetary value.

Also, if no party can argue the “worth or monetary value” of non-economic damages, doesn’t that mean defense lawyers are prevented from telling the jury to award $0?

This proposed law is fundamentally unfair and would raise several constitutional issues. In what other context is a party allowed to pursue a claim for relief, but not allowed to make any reference to the relief they seek?

This proposed law is also an attack on the value of human life. It treats human suffering and loss of enjoyment of life as the black sheep of the law, like there’s a scarlet letter draped around the neck of somebody who dare ask for justice for their losses.

This isn’t reform. It’s a blatant attempt to rig the system against those who have suffered the most.

What’s your opinion? Join the conversation with me on LinkedIn.