GA Code § 9-3-71 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 9 - Civil Practice|Chapter 3 - Limitations of Actions|Article 4 - Limitations for Malpractice Actions|§ 9-3-71. General Limitation

  Except as otherwise provided in this article, an action for medical malpractice shall be brought within two years after the date on which an injury or death arising from a negligent or wrongful act or omission occurred.   Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this Code section, in no event may an action for medical malpractice be brought more than five years after the date on which the negligent or wrongful act or omission occurred.   Subsection (a) of this Code section is intended to create a two-year statute of limitations. Subsection (b) of this Code section is intended to create a five-year statute of ultimate repose and abrogation.   Nothing contained in subsection (a) or (b) of this Code section shall be construed to repeal Code Section 9-3-73, which shall be deemed to apply either to the applicable statutes of limitation or repose.    (Code 1933, § 3-1102, enacted by Ga. L. 1976, p. 1363, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 556, § 1.)   Cross references.   - Tolling of limitations for medical malpractice, § 9-3-97.1.   Editor's notes.   - Ga. L. 1985, p. 556, § 3, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "No action for medical malpractice which, prior to July 1, 1985, has been barred by the provisions of Title 9, relating to actions, shall be revived by this Act. No action for medical malpractice which would be barred before July 1, 1986, by the provisions of this Act but which would not be so barred by the provisions of Title 9 in force immediately prior to July 1, 1985, shall be barred until July 1, 1986."   Law reviews.   - For survey article on torts, see 34 Mercer L. Rev. 271 (1982). For annual survey on torts, see 36 Mercer L. Rev. 327 (1984). For annual survey article on the law of torts, see 45 Mercer L. Rev. 403 (1993). For annual survey article discussing trial practice and procedure, see 52 Mercer L. Rev. 447 (2000). For survey article on trial practice and procedure for the period from June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2003, see 55 Mercer L. Rev. 439 (2003). For annual survey of evidence law, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 235 (2004). For survey article on tort law, see 60 Mercer L. Rev. 375 (2008). For survey article on trial practice and procedure, see 60 Mercer L. Rev. 397 (2008). For article, "Misdiagnosis Law in Georgia: Where Are We Now?," see 16 (No. 5) Ga. St. B.J. 14 (2011). For annual survey of tort laws, see 67 Mercer L. Rev. 237 (2015). For case note, "Lynch v. Waters: Tolling Georgia's Statute of Limitations for Medical Malpractice," see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 1493 (1987). For comment on Parker v. Vaughan, 124 Ga. App. 300, 183 S.E.2d 605 (1971), see 8 Ga. St. B.J. 244 (1971), and 23 Mercer L. Rev. 697 (1972). For comment on statutes of limitations in medical malpractice actions in Georgia, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 377 (1981).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   ANALYSIS    General Consideration   Procedural Requirements   Application of Timing Principles   Specific Actions   Decisions Under § 9-3-33    RESEARCH REFERENCES   Am. Jur. 2d.   - 61 Am. Jur. 2d, Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Healers, § 163 et seq.   19B Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Healers, § 783.   Discovery Date in Medical Malpractice Litigation, 26 POF3d 185.   C.J.S.   - 54 C.J.S., Limitations of Actions, § 215. 70 C.J.S., Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Health Care Providers, § 80.   ALR.    - When statute of limitations commences to run against actions against physicians, surgeons, or dentists for malpractice, 74 A.L.R. 1317; 144 A.L.R. 209, 80 A.L.R.2d 368; 70 A.L.R.3d 7.   Statute of limitations applicable to malpractice action against physician, surgeon, dentist, or similar practitioner, 80 A.L.R.2d 320; 70 A.L.R.4th 535.   When statute of limitations commences to run against malpractice action against physician, surgeon, dentist, or similar practitioner, 80 A.L.R.2d 368; 70 A.L.R.3d 7.   Applicability, to negligence action against hospital, of statute of limitations applicable to malpractice and related actions against physicians, surgeons, or the like, 89 A.L.R.2d 1180.   Applicability, in action against nurse in her professional capacity, of statute of limitations applicable to malpractice, 8 A.L.R.3d 1336.   When statute of limitations commences to run against malpractice action based on leaving foreign substance in patient's body, 70 A.L.R.3d 7.   When statute of limitations begins to run against malpractice action in connection with sterilization or birth control procedures, 93 A.L.R.3d 218.   Medical malpractice statutes of limitation minority provisions, 62 A.L.R.4th 758, 71 A.L.R.5th 307.   Medical malpractice: who are "health care providers," or the like, whose actions fall within statutes specifically governing actions and damages for medical malpractice, 12 A.L.R.5th 1.   Medical malpractice: negligent catheterization, 31 A.L.R.5th 1.   Medical-malpractice countersuits, 61 A.L.R.5th 307.   Timeliness of action under medical malpractice statute of repose, aside from effect of fraudulent concealment of patient's cause of action, 14 A.L.R.6th 301.   When statute of limitations begins to run in case of dental malpractice, 17 A.L.R.6th 159.   Effect of fraudulent or negligent concealment of patient's cause of action on timeliness of action under medical malpractice statute of repose, 19 A.L.R.6th 475.   Application of relation back doctrine permitting change in party after statute of limitations has run in state court action - products liability cases, 93 A.L.R.6th 463.   Application of relation back doctrine permitting change in party after statute of limitations has run in state court action - wrongful death cases, 94 A.L.R.6th 111.   Application of relation back doctrine permitting change in party after statute of limitations has run in state court action - medical malpractice cases against physicians and other individual health care providers, 95 A.L.R.6th 85.   Application of relation-back doctrine permitting change in party after statute of limitations has run in state court action - medical malpractice cases in actions involving hospitals, clinics, and the like, 100 A.L.R.6th 139.   Estoppel to Assert Statute of Limitations or Statute of Repose in Action for Malpractice of Health Care Provider, 45 A.L.R.7th Art. 3.