Georgia Needs COVID-19 Safe Harbor Legislation to Get Back in Business
Georgia law has long recognized that certain activities should not be subject to normal negligent tort liability.
May 07, 2020 at 01:06 PM
4 minute read
Over the past two months, Georgia and the rest of the nation have taken extreme but necessary steps to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. People have been ordered to shelter in place, businesses have been shuttered and unemployment has skyrocketed. When and where the economy will hit rock bottom is unknown. Nationwide, the U.S. economic output dropped 4.8% in the first quarter of this year, the steepest drop since 2008, and that drop does not include April. In Georgia, at the height of the Great Recession in 2009, there were 361,000 new unemployment claims in the first 15 weeks of that year. This year there were over 940,000 new claims in the same time period.
With an easing last week of Gov. Brian Kemp's shelter-in-place order and new guidelines for how businesses should operate and maintain social distancing, business owners—including our grocers, barbers and hair stylists, auto mechanics, drug store owners, etc.—are cautiously considering whether and how to reopen for business. One thing they should not have to weigh in deciding whether and how to operate is potential civil negligent tort liability for the COVID-19 outbreak. As we have come to know, this disease is easily transmittable even by people who are asymptomatic, and no method to prevent its transmission is completely effective absent a widely distributed vaccine, which is still months away at the earliest.
Georgia law has long recognized that certain activities should not be subject to normal negligent tort liability. Property owners have good faith immunity for any injuries to invitees "caused by an inherent risk associated with agritourism, hunting, or fishing activity" (O.C.G.A. § 51-3-31). Medical practitioners who deliver emergency aid at the scene of an accident are not "liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission by such person in rendering emergency care" (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29). Volunteers participating in sports activities run by nonprofits are immune from civil liability if such person was "acting in good faith" (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-201). In addition, good faith immunity has been extended to individuals rendering aid during natural disasters (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.2), school volunteers (O.C.G.A. § 51-2-30.3), firemen "performing duties at the scene of an emergency" (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-30), school personnel for communicating "information in good faith concerning drug abuse by any child to that child's parents" (O.C.G.A. § 51-130.2), firearm instructors who lawfully train individuals in the safe use of firearms (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-55) and security officers at nuclear power plants in the performance of their duties in compliance with a "nuclear security plan" (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-30.4).
Some of these safe-harbor immunities involve volunteers, but others cover businesses operating in higher risk areas we recognize as important to a functioning society. In the midst of this worldwide health crisis and the resulting severe economic fallout, all business owners today—especially small businesses that we rely on to provide the goods and services needed in an integrated society—are in turmoil with their financial business investment and years of sweat equity being placed at dire risk. Not opening subjects them to bankruptcy. Deciding to open should not subject them to the added stress of potential legal liability as a result of a sickness beyond their control to prevent. Furthermore, for those businesses that choose to reopen, it is in our best interest that they do so in conformance with the best available safe health practices, including those outlined by our elected leaders and government departments.
Therefore, when the Georgia General Assembly returns in June to tackle its remaining work in the 2020 regular session, it is important that it include the passage of a COVID-19 Safe Harbor Act that protects businesses by giving them good faith immunity. Good faith should include abiding by safety precautions mandated by the governor in his executive orders or recommended by other relevant state authorities such as the Department of Public Health. This immunity would not, of course, protect against conduct which is reckless, willful or intentional.
Such legislation will give businesses a clear road map on what is permissible and begin the slow progress to moving us toward the "new normal" that awaits us.
Edward Lindsey is a partner in Dentons' public policy practice and serves as the head of the firm's Georgia State government affairs team. A Republican, he served 10 years as a Georgia state representative, including three terms as the House majority whip, and worked for 26 years at Goodman McGuffey Lindsey & Johnson, which he cofounded in 1990.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readGeorgia's Governor Details Spending Plans but Not His Top Priority of Lawsuit Reform
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 2No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 3Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 4Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 5Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250