Demand Letter Preparation in Georgia Personal Injury Cases
Published 17 authorities named
A Georgia demand letter is a written offer that tells an insurer what happened, why its insured is responsible, what the losses are, and what it would take to settle. No statute requires one before an ordinary injury suit. But if the claim arises from a motor vehicle and a lawyer prepares the offer, § 9-11-67.1 sets its required terms. So the first step is deciding which kind of letter this is, because a letter can bind the sender or start a clock.
Which letter are you writing?
| Type | Purpose | Rules | Page |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opening package | Starts negotiation | None specific | This page |
| Motor vehicle offer by a lawyer, before an answer | Possibly binding offer | § 9-11-67.1 | 2024 framework |
| Offer within limits, any tort | Sets up a failure-to-settle claim | Holt line of cases | Time-limited demands |
| § 33-4-6 first-party demand | Insurer's bad faith on your own covered loss | 60 days, by the statute's terms | Bad faith |
| § 33-4-7 demand on vehicle damage | Property damage by a motor vehicle | Its own notice rules | Bad faith |
| Offer under § 9-11-68 | Fee shifting | 30 days after service, written form | Negotiations during litigation |
| Government notice | Precondition to suit | § 36-33-5; § 50-21-26 | Sidewalk falls |
Those are separate tools with separate pages: § 9-11-67.1, time-limited demands, bad faith, and settlement during litigation. A cover letter that mixes them can create problems. Keep each purpose clear.
What to include
| Section | Content | Support |
|---|---|---|
| Identification | Parties, claim number, date, place | Crash or incident report |
| Liability | What happened, and the rule broken | Photos, witnesses, statutes |
| Injuries | Diagnosis and course of treatment | Records |
| Special damages | An itemized list, with dates | Bills, payroll, tax returns |
| Future damages | What's needed, from whom | Doctor's letter, life care plan |
| Life impact | Specifics about daily life | Statements, photos |
| Fault | Address the other side's argument | Evidence |
| Amount and deadline | A clear number and date | Written rule for how to accept |
For the future-care row, see life care plans. Accuracy counts more than volume. In Michaels v. Kroger, 172 Ga. App. 280 (1984), lost earnings needed to be shown “with a reasonable degree of certainty”, and in Womack v. Burgess, 200 Ga. App. 347 (1991), a 50/50 surgery couldn’t reach a jury. So an adjuster who sees an unsupported number may discount everything around it. For newer claims, § 51-12-1.1 means an insurer will compare billed amounts with what health coverage would pay, and letter-of-protection terms are discoverable under (d).
When to send it
| Factor | Earlier | Later |
|---|---|---|
| Medical picture | Clear fault, policy limits plainly too low | Condition has stabilized |
| Evidence | Insurer has what it needs | Records still incomplete |
| Deadlines | Two-year limit near, or a city notice needed | Time to spare |
| Policy | Small limits, competing claimants | Multiple layers |
Maximum medical improvement explains what “stabilized” means.
The two-year limit in § 9-3-33 runs regardless, and a letter doesn’t stop it. A demand sent too close to the deadline may leave no time to file. A person’s consortium claim has four years under the same section, so check the dates separately. Before sending, also confirm the liens so the number leaves room for them, and find out what limits apply. Section 33-3-28 lets a claimant ask an insurer for policy information.
Choosing the amount
No formula applies, and neither does a multiplier. A demand can reflect:
- proved special damages, including future care;
- a reasoned value for pain and limits, based on this person’s life;
- fault shares under § 51-12-33, and the 50 percent bar;
- available coverage, since a figure far above limits changes the discussion;
- what you will accept, known privately.
Don’t invent scientific-sounding precision. Picking a non-round number doesn’t make a demand stronger. An offer inside policy limits raises the insurer’s duty to its insured, as Southern General v. Holt, 262 Ga. 267 (1992), explains. One above limits doesn’t raise that duty, since First Acceptance v. Hughes, 305 Ga. 489 (2019), ties it to a valid offer within limits. A demand that needs another insurer’s money has its own problem, under Cotton States v. Brightman, 276 Ga. 683 (2003).
Mistakes that can hurt
- Overstating. A statement that a person “can’t walk”, followed by a video of walking, damages trust.
- Leaving out prior conditions. The records will show them, so address them first.
- Vague acceptance terms. Spell out what acceptance means, or you may end up arguing whether a deal exists.
- Sending your only copy of a record. Keep complete sets.
- Disclosing what you don’t need to. Medical authorizations should be limited to what’s relevant.
- Offering a release you can’t give. A minor’s claim needs compliance with § 29-3-3, and an estate’s needs a representative.
- Assuming the letter preserves evidence. Send a separate preservation request.
After it’s sent
An adjuster may ask for more records, make a low counter, or say nothing. In Holt, the insurer simply didn’t respond, and that raised a jury question. In Baker v. Huff, 323 Ga. App. 357 (2013), a lawyer cut off medical information and imposed a ten-day limit, and the insurer won. So answer reasonable requests, keep a log, and calendar the suit date. See negotiating with adjusters.
If talks stall, filing suit is the next step. A demand made before suit isn’t lost. A pending offer may also lapse, and pre-suit mediation is an option.
Sources
- Michaels v. Kroger, 172 Ga. App. 280
- Womack v. Burgess, 200 Ga. App. 347
- Southern General v. Holt, 262 Ga. 267
- Cotton States v. Brightman, 276 Ga. 683
- First Acceptance v. Hughes, 305 Ga. 489
- Baker v. Huff, 323 Ga. App. 357
- Official Code of Georgia Annotated, November 2022 public release: §§ 9-3-33, 9-11-67.1, 9-11-68, 29-3-3, 33-3-28, 33-4-6, 33-4-7, 36-33-5, 50-21-26, 51-12-33
- Georgia Senate Bill 68 (2025): § 51-12-1.1
This page was last reviewed in November 2026 for general information. Laws and court decisions can change after that date. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Authorities cited
Georgia code
- O.C.G.A. § 9-11-67.1
- O.C.G.A. § 33-4-6
- O.C.G.A. § 33-4-7
- O.C.G.A. § 9-11-68
- O.C.G.A. § 36-33-5
- O.C.G.A. § 50-21-26
- O.C.G.A. § 51-12-1.1
- O.C.G.A. § 9-3-33
- O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33
- O.C.G.A. § 29-3-3
- O.C.G.A. § 33-3-28
Court decisions
- Michaels v. Kroger, 172 Ga. App. 280
- Womack v. Burgess, 200 Ga. App. 347
- Southern General v. Holt, 262 Ga. 267
- Cotton States v. Brightman, 276 Ga. 683
- First Acceptance v. Hughes, 305 Ga. 489
- Baker v. Huff, 323 Ga. App. 357
Leave a Reply