Standard of care expert witnesses in Georgia medical malpractice

A Georgia malpractice expert has to qualify under O.C.G.A. § 24-7-702(c), and the test looks backward: what was the expert doing when the alleged act happened? The expert must have been licensed then, and regularly engaged in the same area of practice or specialty for at least three of the prior five years. The statute treats nurses and physicians differently in one direction only. A judge decides qualification, and an excluded expert can end a case.

The requirements in order

Section 24-7-702(c) applies in professional malpractice actions and requires that, “at the time the act or omission is alleged to have occurred”, the expert:

1. was licensed in the state where the expert was practicing or teaching;
2. had “actual professional knowledge and experience in the area of practice or specialty in which the opinion is to be given”;
3. gained that knowledge by regularly engaging in either the active practice of that area, or teaching it as an employed faculty member of an accredited institution, “for at least three of the last five years”, with “sufficient frequency”, as determined by the judge; and
4. is a member of the same profession, except as stated next.

The “sufficient frequency” language is tied to “performing the procedure, diagnosing the condition, or rendering the treatment” at issue. A cardiologist who has not done the procedure in question may have a problem even within the same specialty.

Subsection (c)(2)(C) isn’t a “same or closely related specialty” rule. The specialty language comes from the words “area of practice or specialty” in (c)(2). Paragraph (C) is the same-profession clause, and “closely related” is not in the statute’s text.

Physicians, osteopaths, and nurses

Paragraph (C) treats medical doctors and doctors of osteopathy as able to testify against each other. Paragraph (D) then creates a one-way exception.

Expert	About	Allowed?	Statute
Physician who, for 3 of the last 5 years, supervised, taught, or instructed nurses	A nurse's standard of care	Yes, if the physician has knowledge of that standard	(c)(2)(D)
Nurse, physician assistant, or therapist	A physician's standard of care	No	(c)(2)(D)
Physician with no such experience	A nurse's standard	No, under the same-profession rule	(c)(2)(C)

The same paragraph covers nurse practitioners, certified registered nurse anesthetists, nurse midwives, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, and medical support staff. It’s wrong as a blanket rule to say that physicians “cannot” testify about nursing. Nursing negligence claims covers how that plays out.

Retirement and timing

Because qualification is measured at the time of the act, an expert who retired before the act has a problem, and one who retired after it may not. For example, imagine an alleged error in June 2023. An expert who practiced full time until 2021 had three of the prior five years, so the retirement alone does not settle the issue. An expert who retired in 2018 did not, unless teaching fills the gap. The statute’s “three of the last five years” is a fact to be shown, and the “sufficient frequency” requirement is on top.

The Daubert side of the rule

Section 24-7-702(b) and (f) make Georgia’s rule follow the federal line of decisions. Subsection (f) says Georgia courts “may draw from” Daubert, Joiner, Kumho Tire, and related federal cases, and that its courts should “not be viewed as open to expert evidence that would not be admissible in other states”. So a qualified expert’s opinion can still be challenged for its method or its basis. In Cayamcela v. Advocacy Trust, S26A0229 (2026), the Supreme Court found no abuse of discretion in excluding parts of an obstetrician’s testimony about ICU care, after he said he hadn’t reviewed those records well enough to answer. Under (d), on a party’s motion, the court may hold a pretrial hearing, completed by the final pretrial conference. See expert disclosures and Daubert.

What the expert has to say

The expert addresses the standard from § 51-1-27, which requires “a reasonable degree of care and skill”, and how the defendant’s conduct compared to it. Causation requires its own testimony, and Zwiren v. Thompson, 276 Ga. 498 (2003), says an expert’s opinion on causation must be “in terms stronger than that of medical possibility, i.e., reasonable medical probability or reasonable medical certainty”. See causation challenges.

A standard-of-care expert is not necessarily the right causation witness. A pathologist or oncologist may be better placed to say what would have happened with earlier treatment, even if that person could not qualify on the standard of care. Each opinion should be matched with a witness who can support it.

Same test at the affidavit stage

Under § 24-7-702(e), “an affiant shall meet the requirements of this Code section” for the affidavit required by § 9-11-9.1. That is why qualification should be checked before signing, and the affidavit page explains the consequences for the case.

Questions to ask a proposed expert

• Where were you licensed on the date of the act?
• Were you practicing or teaching in this specialty for three of the five years before it?
• How often did you perform this procedure or treat this condition in that period?
• If you are a physician addressing a nurse’s care, did you supervise, teach, or instruct nurses in those years?
• Is your opinion based on a method you can explain?

A candidate who cannot answer these with records may not survive a motion, regardless of reputation.

Sources

• Official Code of Georgia Annotated, November 2022 public release: §§ 9-11-9.1, 24-7-702, 51-1-27
• Zwiren v. Thompson, 276 Ga. 498
• Cayamcela v. Advocacy Trust, S26A0229 (2026)

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.