HB 339: Motor vehicles; exempt ride share drivers or ride share network services from definition of motor carrier

Georgia law regulates who counts as a 'motor carrier' and sets rules for vehicles that transport people for hire. This bill amends that law (O.C.G.A. § 40-1-100) to clean up and relocate the definition of 'elderly or disabled passenger' so it applies once, clearly, instead of being repeated in multiple places, and it removes an outdated definition of 'Department.' The bigger change is a brand new section, O.C.G.A. § 40-1-201, which says a ride share network service (the company that runs an app connecting riders and drivers) cannot be sued under theories like vicarious liability or product liability for a crash caused by one of its drivers. That protection only applies if the company was not itself negligent or criminally at fault, followed the legal duties it owes drivers, and ran a criminal background check on each driver at least every two years. The bill also says the company's digital network counts as a service, not a product, which matters for product liability claims.

• Adds a new Georgia code section (O.C.G.A. § 40-1-201) that protects ride share companies from being held liable for a driver's crash if the company met certain conditions.
• Requires ride share companies to run a criminal background check, or get a certified private background check, on each driver at least once every two years to keep this liability protection.
• Declares that a ride share company's digital network is a 'service' rather than a 'product,' blocking product liability claims based on the app itself.
• Consolidates and rewrites the definition of 'elderly or disabled passenger' in Georgia's motor carrier law so it appears once instead of being repeated in several subsections.
• Removes an outdated definition that called the Department of Public Safety the 'Department' under this article.

Ride share companies such as Uber and Lyft that operate in Georgia, the drivers who work for them, passengers who use ride share apps, and people injured in crashes involving ride share vehicles who might otherwise sue the company itself.

If someone is hurt in a crash caused by a ride share driver, this bill would generally block them from suing the ride share company itself, as long as the company ran the required background checks and was not negligent. That shifts legal exposure toward the individual driver rather than the platform.

• Section 1 revises O.C.G.A. § 40-1-100 to define 'elderly or disabled passenger' as anyone over 60 or unable to use mass transportation due to illness, injury, age, or disability, and removes duplicate versions of that definition elsewhere in the statute.
• Section 1 also removes the definition labeling 'Department' as the Department of Public Safety within this part of the code.
• Section 2 creates new Code Section 40-1-201, stating ride share network services are not liable under vicarious or product liability theories for a driver's crash if three conditions are met: no negligence or criminal misconduct by the company, compliance with legal duties to drivers, and a criminal background check every two years.
• Section 2 also states that a ride share company's digital or internet network is a service, not a product, for liability purposes.
• Section 3 repeals any conflicting laws.

1. 2025-07-01Effective Date
2. 2025-05-14Act 257
3. 2025-05-14House Date Signed by Governor (House)
4. 2025-04-08House Sent to Governor (House)
5. 2025-04-02Senate Passed/Adopted (Senate)
6. 2025-04-02Senate Third Read (Senate)
7. 2025-04-02Senate Taken from Table (Senate)
8. 2025-04-02Senate Tabled (Senate)

• Rob Leverett (R, HD-123)Primary sponsor
• Chuck Efstration (R, HD-104)
• Bruce Williamson (R, HD-112)
• Houston Gaines (R, HD-120)
• Stan Gunter (R, HD-8)
• Demetrius Douglas (D, HD-78)
• Brian Strickland (R, SD-42)

1. PassedHouse voteMarch 4, 2025

   166 yea, 0 nay (8 not voting, 6 excused)

   PASSAGE: House Vote #173

2. PassedSenate voteApril 2, 2025

   46 yea, 7 nay (2 not voting, 1 excused)

   PASSAGE: Senate Vote #421

• ride share regulation
• motor vehicle law
• liability protection
• Uber and Lyft
• driver background checks