By Gain Servicing
When Georgia lawmakers passed Senate Bill 68 in 2025, both supporters and critics said the real test would come in the appellate courts. That test has arrived. On Oct. 29, the Georgia Court of Appeals granted Walmart a new trial in a Valdosta slip-and-fall case and wiped out a $975,000 jury verdict. As reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Walmart is the first company to successfully appeal a jury verdict under the new law.
For personal injury attorneys, healthcare providers and injured plaintiffs, the ruling is an early look at how Georgia tort reform is changing the way damages are argued in court and what that could mean for case timelines.
What Happened in the Walmart Case
Ruby Medders slipped on spilled liquid in the dog food aisle of a Valdosta Walmart in November 2020. Case records show the liquid had been on the floor for 32 minutes and that two employees walked past it without cleaning it up. At a January 2026 trial, the jury found Walmart 95% at fault for her knee and ankle injuries and awarded $975,000. After accounting for her 5% share of fault, the judgment came to just over $926,000.
The court reversed the judgment and sent the case back to Lowndes County for a new trial. The jury’s fault finding was not the basis for the reversal. The appeal turned on how damages were argued.
The three-judge panel found that Medders’ attorney improperly suggested a value for pain and suffering based in part on the federal minimum wage and on the rate Walmart paid its medical expert. Writing for the panel, Judge Trea Pipkin concluded that the uncorrected argument was harmful and could have affected the verdict. Medders’ attorney has said the team is evaluating its options, which may include asking the Georgia Supreme Court to review the case.
Why SB 68 Matters
Signed by Gov. Brian Kemp in April 2025, SB 68 is the centerpiece of Georgia’s tort reform package. One of its most debated provisions targets “anchoring,” the practice of suggesting a dollar figure for non-economic damages by tying it to an outside benchmark. Under the law, arguments about pain and suffering damages cannot reference values that have no rational relationship to the facts of the case, and an attorney who argues a figure in closing cannot introduce a different one in rebuttal.
Comparisons like those in the Medders trial were likely permissible before SB 68, and case records show even the trial judge was unsure how to apply the new rules. The opinion now gives Georgia trial courts a concrete reference point.
Supporters say the provision keeps arbitrary numbers out of the courtroom and helps rein in outsized verdicts and insurance costs. Critics argue it makes it harder for juries to value suffering that has no natural price tag, and neither side has yet produced public data linking lower verdicts to lower premiums.
What This Means for Plaintiffs and Their Attorneys
Pain and suffering arguments will need to be built from the record itself, including medical testimony, treatment history and the plaintiff’s own account of daily limitations. Benchmarks drawn from outside the evidence now carry real appellate risk, even when a trial judge allows them. Medders’ attorney told the AJC he expects the opinion to shape how damages are argued in injury trials going forward.
There is also a timing cost. Medders was injured in 2020, filed suit in 2022 and went to trial in 2026. Her medical expenses alone were roughly $186,000. A new trial or a Supreme Court appeal adds more months of unresolved bills and lost income, and defendants may point to this ruling during settlement negotiations.
What this ruling has established is that one verdict was vacated over how pain and suffering damages were argued. Whether the Georgia Supreme Court weighs in, and how much the decision moves verdict values, remains open.
The Bigger Picture
The Walmart ruling concerns SB 68 specifically, but it sits alongside SB 69, which regulates third-party litigation funding. As of Jan. 1, 2026, litigation financiers must register with the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance, and their involvement in a case can be discoverable. Businesses, insurers, attorneys and providers are watching how courts apply both.
The effects may not stay in Georgia. Florida passed its own reforms in 2023, and other states are weighing similar legislation.
Why Access to Financial Support Still Matters
When a verdict is vacated, the injury and the medical bills remain. Plaintiffs still have rent to pay, and providers who treated patients on a lien basis wait longer to be paid. Medical lien servicing and consumer legal funding help bridge that gap while cases move through the system, so injured people can keep getting care. For plaintiffs weighing their options, What Happens to Pre-Settlement Funding If You Lose Your Case? explains how funding works when a case does not end as expected.
One Ruling, Broader Questions
The Walmart decision is one of the first appellate applications of SB 68, and more cases will test how courts interpret the anchoring rules. The larger question for Georgia tort reform is how to balance litigation limits with fair compensation and access to justice for people injured through no fault of their own.
For more information on legal updates on consumer legal funding across U.S. states, check out our reporting here.