Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 24-4-416 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 24-4-416 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 24-4-416

TITLE 24 EVIDENCE

Section 4. Relevant Evidence and its Limits, 24-4-401 through 24-4-418.

ARTICLE 2 LEGISLATIVE FACTS; ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS

24-4-416. Statements of sympathy in medical malpractice cases.

  1. As used in this Code section, the term "health care provider" means any person licensed under Chapter 9, 10A, 11, 11A, 26, 28, 30, 33, 34, 35, 39, or 44 of Title 43 or any hospital, nursing home, home health agency, institution, or medical facility licensed or defined under Chapter 7 of Title 31. The term shall also include any corporation, professional corporation, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, authority, or other entity composed of such health care providers.
  2. In any claim or civil proceeding brought by or on behalf of a patient allegedly experiencing an unanticipated outcome of medical care, any and all statements, affirmations, gestures, activities, or conduct expressing regret, apology, sympathy, commiseration, condolence, compassion, mistake, error, or a general sense of benevolence which is made by a health care provider or an employee or agent of a health care provider to the patient, a relative of the patient, or a representative of the patient and which relates to the unanticipated outcome shall be inadmissible as evidence and shall not constitute an admission of liability or an admission against interest.

(Code 1981, §24-4-416, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24; Ga. L. 2013, p. 141, § 24/HB 79.)

The 2013 amendment, effective April 24, 2013, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, substituted "composed of" for "comprised of" in the last sentence of subsection (a).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37.1 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Application and illustrations.

- Neither former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-4-408) nor former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37.1 prevented admitting a letter from the defendant medical device manufacturer because there was evidence plaintiff patient's surgeon requested that the manufacturer pay for third surgery to replace the device, and the letter in response confirmed the terms; further, there was evidence the offer was made to maintain the surgeon's goodwill due to the number of devices the surgeon implanted in patients on a yearly basis. Trickett v. Advanced Neuromodulation Sys., 542 F. Supp. 2d 1338 (S.D. Ga. 2008) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37.1)

Evidence properly excluded.

- In a medical negligence action, the trial court properly excluded statements of regret made by the doctor sued pursuant to the plain meaning of former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37.1(c), despite the suing patient's claim that such should have been admitted as statements against interest and under the res gestae exception to the hearsay rule; moreover, retroactive application was not improper as the Georgia General Assembly intended that the law be applied to cases pending at the time the law was passed. Airasian v. Shaak, 289 Ga. App. 540, 657 S.E.2d 600 (2008) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-3-37.1)

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Admissibility in action for malpractice, of evidence as to reputation of physician or surgeon for skill and care, 48 A.L.R. 249.

No results found for Georgia Code 24-4-416.