---
title: O.C.G.A. § 51-1-27. Recovery for medical malpractice authorized.
collection: code
id: 51-1-27
cite_as: O.C.G.A. § 51-1-27 (2025)
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1-27
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1-27.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1-27/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/t51-(v39)-2017-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=6b891965_0#page=155
date: 2025
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1-26.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/code/51-1-28.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: TORTS / GENERAL PROVISIONS
---

# O.C.G.A. § 51-1-27. Recovery for medical malpractice authorized.

A person professing to practice surgery or the administering of medicine for compensation must bring to the exercise of his profession a reasonable degree of care and skill. Any injury resulting from a want of such care and skill shall be a tort for which a recovery may be had.

## History

Orig. Code 1863, § 2915; Code 1868, § 2922; Code 1873, § 2973; Code 1882, § 2973; Civil Code 1895, § 3831; Civil Code 1910, § 4427; Code 1933, § 84-924.

## Cross References

Time limitations for bringing of actions for medical malpractice, § 9-3-70 et seq. Giving of consent for surgical or medical treatment, T. 31, C. 9. Observance of provisions of ‘‘living wills’’ by physicians and other health-care professionals, § 31-32-7. Recovery in tort for malpractice of chiropractor, § 43-9-16. Regulation of practice of physicians generally, § 43-34-20 et seq. Suspension of license to practice medicine and other disciplining of physicians, § 43-34-37.

## Law Reviews

For article, ‘‘No-Fault Insurance for Injuries Arising From Medical Treatment: A Proposal for Elective Coverage,’’ see 24 Emory L.J. 21 (1975). For article analyzing the trend in this country toward no-fault liability, see 25 Emory L.J. 163 (1976). For article, ‘‘Baby Doe Cases: Compromise and Moral Di-lemma,’’ see 34 Emory L.J. 545 (1985). For annual survey of law of torts, see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 351 (1986). For article, ‘‘State of Emergency: Why Georgia’s Standard of Care in Emergency Rooms is Harmful to Your Health,’’ see 45 Ga. L. Rev. 275 (2010).

For note, ‘‘Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Actions,’’ see 7 Ga. St. B. J. 470 (1971). For note, ‘‘Informed Consent: The Illusion of Patient Choice,’’ see 23 Emory L.J. 503 (1974).

For comment on Specht v. Gaines, 65 Ga. App. 782, 16 S.E.2d 507 (1941), see 4 Ga. B. J. 49 (1942). For comment on Saffold v. Scarborough, 91 Ga. App. 628, 86 S.E.2d 649 (1955), holding that the running of the statute of limitations for medical malpractice was properly postponed due to allegations of fraud, and suit for alleged malpractice instituted within two years after the discovery of such fraud was not barred, see 18 Ga. B. J. 79 (1955). For comment on Carroll v. Griffin, 96 Ga. App. 826, 101 S.E.2d 764 (1958), affirming a verdict for defendant-doctor when patient failed to prove he had been abandoned by the physician, see 21 Ga. B. J. 105 (1958). For comment on Hayes v. Brown, 108 Ga. App. 360, 133 S.E.2d 102 (1963), see 26 Ga. B. J. 456 (1964). For comment on Gian-Cursio v. State, Epstein v. State, 180 So.2d 396 (Fla. 1965), as to the appropriate school of practice for expert witnesses testifying in chiropractor malpractice cases, see 18 Mercer L. Rev. 292 (1966). For comment, ‘‘Legislative Limitations on Medical Malpractice Damages: The Chances of Survival,’’ see 37 Mercer L. Rev. 1583 (1986). For comment, ‘‘Medical Expert Systems and Publisher Liability: A Cross-Contextual Analysis,’’ see 43 Emory L.J. 731 (1994).