Roberts v. Unison Behavioral Health

Sally Madison Roberts was injured when her car was hit by a van owned by Unison Behavioral Health, a state-affiliated community service board. Before suing, Georgia law required her to send the state a notice describing her claim, including the 'nature of the loss suffered.' Her notice listed things like bodily injury, pain and suffering, medical expenses, and lost earnings, but did not describe her specific injuries in detail. Unison argued the notice was too vague and asked a Bacon County court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction because Georgia's tort claims law requires the state's limited waiver of immunity to be followed exactly. A trial judge disagreed, but the Court of Appeals of Georgia sided with Unison. The Supreme Court of Georgia took up the case and decided the notice was sufficient because the law only requires listing the general types of loss, not detailed descriptions of specific injuries, so it reversed the Court of Appeals.

The court held that OCGA § 50-21-26 (a) (5) (D) requires a claimant to state only the general types or categories of loss suffered, such as bodily injury, pain and suffering, or lost wages, not detailed descriptions of specific injuries, and Roberts's notice met that standard.

The ruling clarifies how much detail accident victims must include when notifying Georgia state agencies before suing them, making it easier to preserve claims against the state without providing exhaustive medical detail up front, while also overruling a prior Court of Appeals decision that had demanded more.

Reversed

1. The Georgia Tort Claims Act waives the state's sovereign immunity (its usual legal protection from being sued) only if a claimant strictly follows the act's notice requirements before filing suit, so the court examined the exact statutory text.
2. The statute requires a notice to state the 'nature of the loss suffered' to the extent of the claimant's knowledge and as practicable, but the court found this phrase does not require sharing every detail known; it only requires listing the categories of loss.
3. Looking to the ordinary meaning of 'nature' (kind or type) and the statute's own definition of 'loss' (personal injury, pain and suffering, lost wages, and similar categories), the court concluded that naming these general categories satisfies the requirement.
4. The court reviewed its earlier decision in Williams v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources and later Court of Appeals cases, finding they all turned on whether a type of loss (such as wrongful death) was omitted entirely, not on whether enough detail about injuries was given.
5. The court found that a prior Court of Appeals decision, Bailey v. Georgia World Congress Center, wrongly demanded specific injury details beyond what the statute requires, and it overruled that case as inconsistent with the statute's plain language.
6. Applying this standard to Roberts's notice, which listed bodily injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, medical expenses, lost earnings, and diminished earning capacity, the court concluded it adequately described the nature of her loss.

• ante litem notice
• Georgia Tort Claims Act
• sovereign immunity
• car accident lawsuit
• notice requirements