Who has the burden of proving the defendant was negligent in Georgia?


In a Georgia negligence case, the injured person bringing the claim carries the burden of proving the defendant was negligent. As the party asserting the claim, the plaintiff must establish each element, duty, breach, causation, and damages, by a preponderance of the evidence. The defendant does not have to prove its own innocence; the law starts from the position that the plaintiff must make the case.

Why the burden sits with the claimant

Civil litigation generally places the burden of proof on the party seeking to change the status quo by recovering money. The injured person is asking a court to find the defendant at fault and order compensation, so that person must come forward with evidence supporting every part of the claim. If the plaintiff offers no evidence, or evidence that only balances out against the defense, the claim fails because the burden was not carried.

This allocation has a practical edge. It means gathering and presenting proof of fault is the plaintiff’s responsibility from the start, including the records, testimony, and any expert opinion needed to show the defendant fell below the standard of ordinary care.

What the defendant must prove

Although the plaintiff bears the main burden, certain defenses shift a narrower burden to the defendant. When the defendant raises an affirmative defense, it generally must prove that defense. Examples include:

  • Comparative fault, where the defendant argues the plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to the injury. The defendant typically must support the facts showing the plaintiff’s share of fault.
  • Assumption of the risk or a statute-of-limitations bar, which the defendant raises and must establish.

So the overall picture is split: the plaintiff proves negligence, and the defendant proves the specific defenses it chooses to assert.

How burden-shifting devices fit in

Some doctrines adjust how the plaintiff meets the burden without removing it. Negligence per se, for instance, lets a plaintiff use a safety-statute violation to establish breach, easing part of the proof. The doctrine sometimes summarized as “the thing speaks for itself” can allow an inference of negligence from circumstances in limited situations. These tools help the plaintiff carry the burden; they do not transfer the ultimate burden to the defendant.

The bottom line

The injured plaintiff in a Georgia case bears the burden of proving the defendant’s negligence by a preponderance of the evidence. The defendant carries the burden only on affirmative defenses it raises, such as comparative fault, while doctrines like negligence per se assist the plaintiff in meeting, but do not shift, the core burden of proof.


This article is for general educational and informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship, and Georgia law may change. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed Georgia personal injury attorney.

Leave a Reply