Senate Bill 68 (signed April 21, 2025) created a statutory right to bifurcate trials in bodily injury and wrongful death cases. Under the new provision, any party may request that the trial be split into separate phases for liability and damages, provided the request is made before the pretrial order. The court must grant the request unless the amount in controversy is less than $150,000 or the case involves certain sexual offenses against minors where the victim would suffer serious emotional distress from testifying twice. If punitive damages are claimed, a third phase addresses punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, creating a potential trifurcation. In the first phase, the jury determines liability and fault allocation. If the jury finds the defendant liable, the second phase on compensatory damages proceeds immediately before the same judge and jury. This structural change prevents juries from hearing about the severity of injuries until after fault is determined, which many practitioners view as favoring defendants by removing the emotional impact of injury evidence from the liability decision. The bifurcation provision applies retroactively to all pending and future cases. Practical implications for trial strategy are significant: in Phase 1 (liability only), plaintiff’s counsel cannot show the jury photographs of catastrophic injuries, cannot present life care planners or economists, and cannot use the severity of the harm to build sympathy for the liability finding. Defense counsel benefits from this separation because jurors deciding fault without seeing graphic injury evidence may be more willing to assign substantial fault to the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s counsel must build a compelling liability narrative using facts, expert testimony on the defendant’s conduct, and demonstrative evidence about the mechanics of the incident rather than relying on injury impact.
100.1. What strategic considerations affect whether a defendant should request bifurcation in a Georgia personal injury trial?
Defendants benefit from bifurcation when the plaintiff’s injuries are severe and sympathetic, because separating liability from damages prevents the jury from being influenced by the emotional impact of injury evidence during the fault determination. Cases involving catastrophic injuries, disfigurement, or child plaintiffs present the strongest incentive for defense bifurcation requests. However, bifurcation may not always favor the defendant: in cases where liability is strong and damages are modest, keeping the trial unified may lead to a faster resolution. The decision also affects trial logistics, witness scheduling, and overall litigation costs for both sides.
100.2. How does the $150,000 threshold operate in determining whether bifurcation can be denied?
The court may deny a bifurcation request only if the total amount in controversy is less than $150,000 or the case involves certain sexual offenses. The $150,000 figure refers to the total controversy, not the damages ultimately awarded. If the plaintiff’s pleadings, discovery, or pretrial disclosures indicate that the total potential damages exceed $150,000, the court must grant the bifurcation request. In practice, most cases involving significant personal injuries will exceed this threshold, making bifurcation available in the majority of contested trials.
100.3. How does bifurcation affect the presentation of medical evidence and expert testimony?
In a bifurcated trial, the first phase focuses on whether the defendant breached a duty and whether that breach caused the plaintiff’s injury. Medical evidence relevant to causation, such as the mechanism of injury and whether the defendant’s conduct caused it, is presented in the first phase. Evidence about the extent of injuries, treatment costs, prognosis, and pain and suffering is reserved for the second phase. This separation requires attorneys to plan their medical expert presentations carefully, as the same expert may need to testify in both phases about different aspects of the case.
100.4. Can a plaintiff oppose a bifurcation request, and what arguments support denial?
A plaintiff opposing bifurcation must show that the amount in controversy is below $150,000 or that the case falls within the sexual offense exception. Outside those grounds, the statute provides a right to bifurcation that the court must honor. Plaintiffs may argue that bifurcation creates inefficiency, requires duplicative testimony, or unfairly compartmentalizes evidence that the jury needs to consider as a whole. However, under SB 68, these arguments do not provide grounds for denial if the statutory threshold is met. Some plaintiffs may strategically value their cases below $150,000 to avoid bifurcation, though this limits their recovery potential.
100.5. How does trifurcation work when punitive damages are claimed alongside compensatory damages?
When a plaintiff seeks punitive damages, the trial may proceed in three phases. Phase one determines liability and fault allocation. Phase two, if liability is found, determines compensatory damages including both special and general damages. Phase three determines punitive damages and may also address attorneys’ fees under applicable statutes. The trifurcation structure ensures that punitive damages evidence, which may include evidence of the defendant’s financial condition and prior misconduct, does not influence the compensatory damages determination. This aligns with Georgia’s existing bifurcation requirement for punitive damages under O.C.G.A. section 51-12-5.1 but extends the separation to include a distinct liability phase.
100.6. How does bifurcation interact with comparative fault analysis in Georgia?
In a bifurcated trial, the first phase requires the jury to determine not only whether the defendant was negligent but also the comparative fault of the plaintiff and any other parties. The comparative fault allocation determines whether the plaintiff can recover at all under the 50% bar and by what percentage any recovery is reduced. The damages phase then applies the fault percentages established in phase one to the compensatory damages determined in phase two. This interaction means the first phase carries enormous weight: a finding of 50% or more plaintiff fault ends the case entirely, regardless of how serious the injuries are.
100.7. What effect does bifurcation have on settlement dynamics and case valuation?
Bifurcation creates significant settlement pressure on plaintiffs, particularly those with strong damages but contested liability. If the jury first determines fault without hearing about injuries, a plaintiff with substantial injuries but borderline liability faces the risk of losing entirely in the first phase. This dynamic pushes plaintiffs toward earlier settlement. Defendants also face strategic calculations: a phase one loss on liability may motivate higher settlement offers before the damages phase, because the defendant now faces a jury that has already found fault and will next hear about the full extent of injuries. The bifurcation structure is expected to increase pre-trial and inter-phase settlement activity.
100.8. Does the bifurcation right apply to all personal injury case types, including medical malpractice and product liability?
The statutory bifurcation right applies to any action to recover damages for bodily injury or wrongful death. This includes automobile accidents, premises liability, medical malpractice, product liability, and all other personal injury case types. The only exceptions are cases below the $150,000 threshold and certain sexual offense cases. The broad scope means that bifurcation will become a standard feature of Georgia personal injury trials across all practice areas, fundamentally changing how trial teams prepare and present their cases.
Disclaimer: This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this material. Georgia law is subject to change through new legislation and court decisions. Always consult a qualified Georgia attorney for advice specific to your situation.