Georgia Supreme Court Expands Potential Unlimited Punitive Damages in Civil Cases Involving an Intoxicated Defendant

In Reid v. Morris, Case No. S20A0107 (Ga. S. Ct., June 29, 2020), the Supreme Court of Georgia held that under Georgia’ s punitive damages statute, a defendant may be subject to unlimited punitive damages if he commits a tort while intoxicated—even if the tort does not involve driving under the influence. In this case, the two defendants, Stroud and Morris, were drinking together, and though Stroud knew Morris was drunk, had no license, and was known to be reckless, he gave Morris his car keys and let him drive. The plaintiff was injured when his vehicle was struck by the vehicle driven by Morris.

The plaintiff sued both Morris and Stroud. He alleged that Stroud negligently entrusted the vehicle to Morris, and he sought punitive damages against both defendants. The trial court ruled that under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-5.1(f), only an “active tortfeasor” could be liable for punitive damages, which would only be the impaired driver. The Georgia Supreme Court vacated this part of the trial court’s judgment and remanded the case to determine whether Stroud was an “active tortfeasor” and thereby subject to punitive damages.

Construing O.C.G.A. § 51-12-5.1(f), the Court held that an “’active tort-feasor,’ as used in the statute, is not necessarily limited to drunk drivers.” Instead, the statute imposes unlimited punitive damages when “the defendant was intoxicated to the degree that his judgment was substantially impaired” and his “positive acts of negligence” were the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.

Now, after Reid v. Morris, Defendants and liability insurers must consider the potential for unlimited punitive damages in all cases in which alcohol or drugs are involved, not just those involving DUI drivers. For example, if a homeowner has a few too many drinks before deciding to pressure wash the sidewalk in front of his house on a sub-freezing day, a resulting slip and fall accident with minor injuries could subject the homeowner to unlimited punitive damages under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-5.1(f). Thus, defendants and their counsel should anticipate that plaintiffs’ attorneys will now seek to develop evidence of possible intoxication in most every case.