2022 Georgia Code
Title 9 - Civil Practice
Chapter 10 - Civil Practice and Procedure Generally
Article 2 - Venue
Part 1 - General Provisions
§ 9-10-31. Actions Against Certain Codefendants Residing in Different Counties; Pleading Requirements; Application

1. The General Assembly finds that Paragraph IV of Section II of Article VI of the Georgia Constitution permits a trial and entry of judgment against a resident of Georgia in a county other than the county of the defendant’s residence only if the Georgia resident defendant is a joint obligor, joint tort-feasor, joint promisor, copartner, or joint trespasser.
2. Subject to the provisions of Code Section 9-10-31.1, joint tort-feasors, obligors, or promisors, or joint contractors or copartners, residing in different counties, may be subject to an action as such in the same action in any county in which one or more of the defendants reside.
3. In any action involving a medical malpractice claim as defined in Code Section 9-9-60, a nonresident defendant may require that the case be transferred to the county of that defendant’s residence if the tortious act upon which the medical malpractice claim is based occurred in the county of that defendant’s residence.
4. If all defendants who reside in the county in which an action is pending are discharged from liability before or upon the return of a verdict by the jury or the court hearing the case without a jury, a nonresident defendant may require that the case be transferred to a county and court in which venue would otherwise be proper. If venue would be proper in more than one county, the plaintiff may elect from among the counties in which venue is proper the county and the court in which the action shall proceed.
5. Nothing in this Code section shall be deemed to alter or amend the pleading requirements of Chapter 11 of this title relating to the filing of complaints or answers.

History. Orig. Code 1863, § 3315; Code 1868, § 3327; Code 1873, § 3404; Code 1882, § 3404; Civil Code 1895, § 4952; Civil Code 1910, § 5529; Code 1933, § 3-204; Ga. L. 1999, p. 734, § 1; Ga. L. 2001, p. 4, § 9; Ga. L. 2005, p. 1, § 2/SB 3.

The 2005 amendment, effective February 16, 2005, added subsection (a); redesignated former subsection (a) as present subsection (b); in subsection (b), substituted “Subject to the provisions of Code Section 9-10-31.1, joint” for “Joint or joint and several” at the beginning and deleted the former second sentence which read “If, however, the court determines prior to the commencement of trial that: (1) The plaintiff has brought the action in bad faith against all defendants residing in the county in which the action is brought; or (2) As a matter of law, no defendant residing in the county in which the action is brought is a proper party, the action shall be transferred to the county and court which the plaintiff elects in which venue is proper. The burden of proof on the issue of venue shall be on the party claiming improper venue by a preponderance of evidence.”; added subsection (c); redesignated former subsection (b) as present subsection (d); substituted “or upon the return of a verdict by the jury or the court hearing the case without a jury” for “the commencement of trial” in the first sentence of subsection (d); deleted former subsection (c) which read: “If all defendants who reside in the county in which the action is pending are discharged from liability after the commencement of trial, the case may be transferred to a county and court in which venue would otherwise lie only if all parties consent to such transfer.”; deleted former subsection (d) which read: “For purposes of this Code section, trial shall be deemed to have commenced upon the jury being sworn or, in the instance of a trial without a jury, upon the first witness being sworn.”; and deleted former subsection (f) which read: “This Code section shall apply to actions filed on or after July 1, 1999.”

Cross references.

Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. II, Para. IV.

Code Commission notes.

Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1999, “tort-feasors” was substituted for “tortfeasors” in the first sentence of subsection (a) (now subsection (b)).

Editor’s notes.

Ga. L. 1999, p. 734, § 2, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “It is the intent of the General Assembly through this Act to provide for a fairer and more predictable rule of venue in actions involving joint or joint and several tort-feasors, obligors or promisors, or joint contractors, or copartners, residing in different counties; to establish venue in such actions prior to the commencement of trial in a manner that is fair and constitutionally sound; to eliminate the waste of time and resources to courts and parties under the vanishing venue doctrine; and to bring the law of venue into conformity with the language of Article IV, Section II, Paragraph IV of the Georgia Constitution of 1983.”

Ga. L. 2005, p. 1, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “The General Assembly finds that there presently exists a crisis affecting the provision and quality of health care services in this state. Hospitals and other health care providers in this state are having increasing difficulty in locating liability insurance and, when such hospitals and providers are able to locate such insurance, the insurance is extremely costly. The result of this crisis is the potential for a diminution of the availability of access to health care services and a resulting adverse impact on the health and well being of the citizens of this state. The General Assembly further finds that certain civil justice and health care regulatory reforms as provided in this Act will promote predictability and improvement in the provision of quality health care services and the resolution of health care liability claims and will thereby assist in promoting the provision of health care liability insurance by insurance providers. The General Assembly further finds that certain needed reforms affect not only health care liability claims but also other civil actions and accordingly provides such general reforms in this Act.”

Law reviews.

For note discussing problems with venue in Georgia, and proposing statutory revisions to improve the resolution of venue questions, see 9 Ga. St. B.J. 254 (1972).

For note, “Venue in Multidefendant Civil Practice in Georgia,” see 6 Ga. State U.L. Rev. 427 (1990).

For note on 1999 amendment to this section, see 16 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 7 (1999).

For annual survey article discussing trial practice and procedure, see 51 Mercer L. Rev. 487 (1999).

For annual survey of trial practice and procedure, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 433 (2004).

For article on 2005 amendment of this Code section, see 22 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 221 (2005).

For annual survey of trial practice and procedure, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 381 (2005).

For survey article on trial practice and procedure, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 423 (2007).

For survey article on trial practice and procedure, see 60 Mercer L. Rev. 397 (2008).