Articles Questions answered

How do Georgia malpractice attorneys evaluate standard of care claims?

Published November 7, 2026
No. 33 of 195 in this folder

Filed in Georgia Medical Malpractice FAQ

Last updated: November 7, 2026. Georgia law changes; check the date before relying on any deadline or rule below.

A Georgia malpractice attorney evaluates a standard of care claim by testing whether a qualified expert in the defendant’s field will say the care fell below what the profession generally does under similar circumstances (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-27), and whether that expert can tie the failure to the injury. Everything else in the evaluation, from records to timelines, serves those two opinions.

What the attorney looks at first

The deadline. Before investing in an expert review, the attorney confirms the claim is within two years of the injury and five years of the act (§ 9-3-71). In a misdiagnosis case, the clock generally starts at the missed diagnosis (Kaminer v. Canas, 2007).

The complete records. Office notes, hospital charts, nursing notes, imaging and lab results, medication records, and messages. Providers must respond to a records request within 30 days (§ 31-33-2).

The timeline. The attorney builds a sequence: what was known, when, and what was done. Standard of care claims turn on specific moments in that sequence.

The expert review

The core of the evaluation is a review by an expert who meets Georgia’s qualification rules: actual knowledge and experience in the area at issue, active practice or teaching in at least three of the last five years, and generally the same profession as the defendant (§ 24-7-702). The reviewer answers questions like these:

What would a reasonably careful provider in this specialty have done at each decision point?
Where did this care depart from that, and is the departure documented in the records?
Is the departure a clear failure, or a judgment call between accepted options?
Would proper care more likely than not have changed the outcome (Zwiren v. Thompson, 2003)?

If the reviewer will sign an affidavit identifying at least one negligent act and its factual basis, the case can be filed (§ 9-11-9.1).

Common reasons an evaluation ends

Finding	Why it stops the case
The care was a choice between accepted approaches	No breach of the § 51-1-27 standard
The breach is real but did not change the outcome	Causation fails
The setting was a hospital emergency department or covered OB or surgical care after ED evaluation	Plaintiff must prove gross negligence by clear and convincing evidence (§ 51-1-29.5)
The deadline has passed	Claim barred
The injury is real but the losses are small	Expert-driven litigation can cost more than the claim is worth

The last row is a practical judgment, not a legal rule, and an attorney should explain it plainly if it is the reason for declining.

What the evaluation does not rely on

The attorney does not measure the care against local habits; Georgia rejected the locality rule (McDaniel v. Hendrix, 1991). Guidelines and hospital policies can inform the expert’s view but are not the legal standard. And a bad outcome alone is not evidence, because res ipsa loquitur does not apply in Georgia malpractice cases (Oakes v. Magat, 2003).

What to bring to the first attorney conversation

When you first speak with an attorney, bring the dates, the names of every provider involved, and a list of the moments you believe something should have been done differently. Those moments are what the expert will test.

This article explains Georgia law in general terms. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines in malpractice cases are short and fact-specific, so talk to a Georgia lawyer about your own situation.