Georgia's medical malpractice statute of limitations, codified at O.C.G.A. §§ 9-3-70 through 9-3-73, establishes a dual-deadline framework requiring claims to be filed within two years of the negligent act and no later than five years from that act under an absolute statute of repose. Georgia applies the occurrence rule rather than the discovery rule for most claims, making it one of the most restrictive jurisdictions in the nation.
This article explains the complete temporal framework governing Georgia medical malpractice claims, including limited tolling exceptions, the scope of professional negligence, and significant appellate court decisions from 2020 through 2025.
Core Rules for Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Georgia
The following rules govern filing deadlines, repose periods, discovery accrual, and the distinction between professional negligence and ordinary tort claims under O.C.G.A. §§ 9-3-70 through 9-3-73.
Dual-Deadline Structure
Under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-71, medical malpractice actions must be filed:
- Within two years of the date on which the negligent act or omission occurred
- Within five years of the negligent act under the absolute statute of repose
These deadlines run from the date of the negligent act, not from discovery. The earlier deadline always controls.
Five-Year Statute of Repose
The five-year outer limit operates as an absolute repose period, meaning it cannot be extended through equitable doctrines or discovery principles. Only one exception can extend the repose period:
- Foreign objects negligently left in the body (subject to its own one-year discovery limit).
Outside this narrow circumstance, claims are barred if filed more than five years after the negligent act, regardless of when the injury was discovered. A plaintiff discovering injury in year four has only one year remaining, not the whole two-year limitations period.
Discovery Rule Requirements
Georgia follows the occurrence rule rather than a general discovery rule. However, under the two-part test established in Luem v. Johnson, 263 Ga. App. 27 (2002), the limitations period begins when a plaintiff:
- Knows or should know the nature of the injury.
- Has reason to suspect a causal connection to the defendant's negligent conduct.
Constructive knowledge applies—the standard is what a reasonably diligent plaintiff should have known, not only what they actually knew.
Scope of Professional Negligence
Under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-70, the statute applies to claims arising from:
- Health, medical, dental, or surgical services.
- Rendered by licensed professionals or healthcare institutions.
- Including employees acting within the scope of their duties.
This distinction determines whether the claim is governed by O.C.G.A. § 9-3-71 or by standard personal injury limitation periods under Georgia law.
When the Medical Malpractice Statute Does Not Apply
The medical malpractice limitations framework does not apply when:
- The conduct does not involve professional medical judgment.
- The act is considered ordinary negligence (premises liability, security failures, administrative errors).
In those situations, the standard two-year personal injury period under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-33 applies, without the five-year statute of repose.
Tolling Exceptions That Affect Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Georgia
Georgia recognizes limited tolling exceptions, with minority tolling restricted to children under age five and an absolute five-year repose that cannot be extended through equitable doctrines.
1. Minority/Infancy Tolling for Children Under Age Five
Georgia provides limited minority tolling only for children under age five at the time of the negligent act—a significant departure from O.C.G.A. § 9-3-90, which tolls limitations for all minors until age eighteen in ordinary tort cases.
- Children under age five at the time of injury: Claims must be filed within two years after the child's fifth birthday, but never beyond the child's tenth birthday.
- Children age five or older: No tolling; standard two-year statute of limitations applies.
The Georgia Supreme Court in Deen v. Stevens, 287 Ga. 597 (2010), upheld this framework against constitutional challenges, citing legislative policy objectives including stabilizing malpractice insurance costs and preventing stale claims.
2. Fraudulent Concealment
O.C.G.A. § 9-3-96 provides that fraud or fraudulent concealment tolls the statute of limitations until discovery. In Gallant v. MacDowell, 295 Ga. 1 (2014), the Georgia Supreme Court established three requirements:
- Defendant engaged in fraudulent concealment, preventing discovery.
- The concealment actually prevented or deterred discovery.
- Plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence.
The burden of proving these elements rests entirely on the plaintiff. Mere concealment of malpractice is insufficient; plaintiffs must demonstrate that the fraud actually prevented them from filing within the statutory timeframe. Fraudulent concealment tolls only the two-year limitations period; the five-year repose remains absolute.
3. Foreign Object Exception
O.C.G.A. § 9-3-72 creates Georgia's only statutory discovery rule, applying when a foreign object is negligently left in a patient's body.
- Claims must be filed within one year of discovery or when discovery should have occurred through reasonable care.
- The five-year repose period remains absolute and cannot be extended.
The statute excludes from the "foreign object" definition:
- Chemical compounds.
- Fixation devices.
- Prosthetic aids.
4. Medical Records Request Tolling
O.C.G.A. § 9-3-97.1 provides automatic tolling when a plaintiff timely requests medical records from a healthcare provider.
- Ninety days of automatic tolling upon proper request.
- Possible court extension upon showing good cause.
This provision allows plaintiffs time to obtain and review records before the limitations period expires.
How Georgia Courts Interpret Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations Rules
Recent appellate decisions address mental incapacity tolling, fraudulent concealment limitations, and the interplay between renewal complaints and the statute of repose.
Williams v. Regency Hospital Co., LLC (2025) — Mental Incapacity Tolling Prohibition
The Georgia Supreme Court in Williams v. Regency Hospital Co., LLC (2025) addressed constitutional challenges to O.C.G.A. § 9-3-73(b)'s prohibition on mental incapacity tolling for medical malpractice claims. Applying rational basis scrutiny, the Court upheld the statute against equal protection and due process arguments.
The plaintiff argued that mentally incapacitated adults deserve the same tolling protections as minors under five. The Court rejected this argument, finding the limitation serves legitimate state interests in reducing stale claims and stabilizing malpractice insurance costs. The decision confirms that guardians and conservators must file within the standard two-year period regardless of a patient's cognitive status.
Coleman v. Grenda (2025) — Fraudulent Concealment and Statute of Repose
The Georgia Court of Appeals in Coleman v. Grenda (2025) held that fraudulent concealment cannot extend the five-year statute of repose. The court emphasized that fraud must "actually prevent" filing within the repose period to trigger tolling protection.
The plaintiff underwent heart bypass surgery in March 2017 and developed compartment syndrome requiring multiple amputations. Although he alleged fraudulent concealment, he filed his initial action in 2018—within five years of the negligent act. The court found that because timely filing occurred despite the alleged fraud, the concealment did not "actually prevent" compliance with the statute, negating tolling protection. This decision reinforces the absolute nature of Georgia's five-year repose.
Golden v. Floyd Healthcare Mgmt., Inc. (2023) — Renewal Complaints and Statute of Repose
The Georgia Court of Appeals in Golden v. Floyd Healthcare Mgmt., Inc. (2023) held that renewal actions adding new claims constitute new actions subject to independent limitations analysis. Professional negligence claims were barred by the five-year statute of repose, despite COVID-19 emergency judicial tolling orders.
The plaintiff's original action arising from a July 2016 surgical procedure was filed timely, but a renewal complaint in October 2021 sought to add new theories of liability. The court acknowledged emergency tolling but applied it strictly within existing statutory boundaries, finding that new claims in a renewal complaint must independently satisfy the statute of repose measured from the original negligent act.
Recent Updates to Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations Laws in Georgia
Governor Brian Kemp signed Senate Bill 68 on April 21, 2025, effective July 1, 2025, enacting tort reforms affecting medical malpractice litigation. SB 68 requires "truthful calculation" of medical expenses, limiting recoverable damages to amounts actually paid, eliminates arbitrary anchoring methods for non-economic damages, and permits bifurcated trials.
Senate Bill 69, signed on the same date, regulates third-party litigation financing through mandatory disclosure requirements.
What This Means for Medical Malpractice Filing Deadlines in Georgia
Georgia's two-year limitation period runs from the date of the negligent act, with an absolute five-year repose that cannot be extended. Limited tolling applies only to minors under five and to fraudulent concealment that actually prevented timely filing.
Compliance depends on accurate identification of treatment timelines, injury discovery points, and supporting medical records. Legal AI tools support this work by organizing medical records, building defensible chronologies, and helping firms track statutory deadlines tied to case facts.
Explore Tavrn's legal technology solutions.
.webp)
.webp)
