Apartment Complex Accidents in Georgia

Published Read 5 min read

On this page

A person hurt at a Georgia apartment complex meets one of two rules, depending on where the danger was. Under Cham v. ECI Management Corp., 311 Ga. 170 (2021), OCGA 51-3-1 governs a danger in an area the landlord still possesses, such as a parking lot, and OCGA 44-7-14 governs a danger in an area the tenant possesses, such as the inside of a unit. Crimes on the property now have their own statute.

The Two Statutes

An owner or occupier that invites others onto its premises owes them ordinary care in keeping the premises and approaches safe (OCGA 51-3-1). OCGA 44-7-14 shields a landlord that has fully given up possession and the right of possession from liability to third persons for the tenant’s negligence or illegal use of the premises, while leaving the landlord answerable for defective construction and for failing to keep the premises in repair.

Cham explained how the two fit together where one landlord holds both common areas and leased apartments: “In such cases, a landlord’s tort liability for a danger on its property is determined by the area where that danger lurks. If the dangerous condition that ultimately causes an injury is located in an area the landlord still possesses, then liability under OCGA § 51-3-1 et seq. applies, and OCGA § 44-7-14 does not apply by its own terms.” It continued: “Conversely, if the dangerous condition exists in an area possessed by the tenant (such as in the tenant’s residence), then a landlord’s liability derives from OCGA § 44-7-14 and not from OCGA § 51-3-1.” The court called these “two mutually exclusive sources of liability” and wrote that decisions of the Court of Appeals that failed to distinguish them had “created some confusion.” A footnote to the opinion notes that the court “recognize[s] that there may be situations where someone described as a ‘landlord’ has not ‘fully parted with possession and the right of possession,'” in which case liability “properly would be analyzed under OCGA § 51-3-1 et seq.”

How Narrowly OCGA 44-7-14 Reads

A footnote to Cham states that “OCGA § 44-7-14 has been interpreted narrowly,” and that the court had held that it “does not include a ‘duty of maintenance,'” and had stated that “any alteration or expansion of an out-of-possession landlord’s statutory liability must emanate from the legislature and not from the courts of this State” (quoting Martin v. Johnson-Lemon, 271 Ga. 120 (1999)). The same footnote describes OCGA 44-7-13, which then required the landlord to keep the premises in repair, as a statute that “imposes contractual, but not tort, liability on a landlord” (quoting Colquitt v. Rowland, 265 Ga. 905 (1995)).

OCGA 44-7-13(a) now requires the landlord to keep the premises in repair, and subsection (b), added in 2024, deems every agreement for the use or rental of real property as a dwelling to include a provision that the premises is fit for human habitation. Cham was decided in 2021, before subsection (b) was added.

Guests, and Crimes by Third Persons

Cham arose from an armed robbery in the parking lot of an apartment complex in December 2015, a common area, in which a guest staying with a tenant was killed. The trial ended in a verdict for the owner and manager. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ ruling that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury on the duty owed to a licensee, holding that there was at least slight evidence supporting the instruction, while disagreeing with the Court of Appeals’ “suggestion that a social guest of the tenant generally is a licensee of the landlord.” Three Justices dissented, and the court did not review two other rulings on which the Court of Appeals had reversed. Cham quotes the licensee statute, OCGA 51-3-2, under which the owner of the premises is liable to a licensee only for willful or wanton injury.

Since then, the General Assembly has enacted the negligent security article, OCGA 51-3-50 through 51-3-57, which governs claims that an owner or occupier failed to keep the premises and approaches safe from third persons’ wrongful conduct (OCGA 51-3-50(1)). It applies only to causes of action arising on or after its effective date, April 21, 2025, and earlier causes of action remain governed by prior law (SB 68, Section 9(b); OCGA 51-3-57, history note).

Frequently Asked Questions

What must a tenant attacked in a common area prove under the 2025 article?
Among other elements, that the attack was reasonably foreseeable through a particularized warning or through known prior substantially similar conduct, that the attacker exploited a specific, known physical condition of the premises creating a risk substantially greater than the general risk in the vicinity, and that the owner failed to use ordinary care to remedy or mitigate that condition (OCGA 51-3-51).

Is the landlord liable for a crime committed by another tenant?
Not under the negligent security article if the landlord had begun eviction proceedings against that tenant at the time of the wrongful conduct; the same bar covers a tenant’s guest (OCGA 51-3-54(4)).

Can the management company be sued for a crime on the property?
For negligent security claims, an “owner or occupier” includes any person that manages real property, as well as one that owns, leases, occupies, operates, or maintains it, along with that person’s directors, officers, employees, and agents (OCGA 51-3-50(2)).

Does the 2024 habitability provision apply to every lease?
The Code’s history note gives the effective date of the 2024 amendment (Ga. L. 2024, p. 91, HB 404) as July 1, 2024, and an editor’s note states that it applies to residential lease agreements entered into or renewed on or after that date (OCGA 44-7-13).

  • Cham v. ECI Management Corp., 311 Ga. 170 (2021); Martin v. Johnson-Lemon, 271 Ga. 120 (1999) and Colquitt v. Rowland, 265 Ga. 905 (1995) (as quoted in Cham)
  • OCGA 51-3-1; OCGA 51-3-2 (as quoted in Cham); OCGA 44-7-14; OCGA 44-7-13(a), (b) and history and editor’s notes
  • OCGA 51-3-50(1), (2); OCGA 51-3-51; OCGA 51-3-54(4); OCGA 51-3-57 (history note); Senate Bill 68 (2025), as passed, Section 9(b)

Disclaimer

This article provides general information about the Georgia statutes and decision that bear on injuries at apartment complexes. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Liability depends on where the hazard was located, on the lease, and on the date the cause of action arose. Anyone injured at an apartment complex should consult a licensed Georgia attorney promptly about the particular situation.

Related posts:

  1. College Campus Injury Claims in Georgia Whether a college is public or private decides which statutes govern an injury on its campus. A claim against a state institution runs through the Georgia Tort Claims Act, with......
  2. Boating and Watercraft Accident Claims in Georgia In a civil claim, Georgia's statutes treat a boat much as they treat a car: the owner of a watercraft "shall be liable for any tort caused by the operation......
  3. Gym and Fitness Center Injuries in Georgia Georgia's courts have held that a business can release itself from its own negligence but not from gross negligence or wilful misconduct, and the exact words of a release can......
  4. Delivery Van Accidents: Amazon, FedEx, and UPS Claims After a crash with a delivery van, the person who was hit needs to know who stands behind the driver and what coverage stands behind the van. Georgia law answers......
  5. Claims Against Georgia State Agencies: Tort Claims Act Explained Yes, a Georgia state agency can be sued for an injury its employee causes while on the job, but only on the terms of the Georgia Tort Claims Act, and......
  6. Falling Merchandise Injuries in Georgia Stores A shopper struck by merchandise that falls from a shelf or stack raises a premises question that differs from a slip on a spill. In a spill case the dispute......
  7. Georgia’s 50% Bar Rule: How Comparative Negligence Affects Your Claim Georgia's 50 percent bar decides whether an injured person's award shrinks or disappears. If the trier of fact finds the injured person less than 50 percent responsible, the judge reduces......
  8. Aviation Accident Claims in Georgia: Pursuing Compensation for Plane Crashes and Air Travel Injuries After a plane crash, federal law decides several things a Georgia claim can and cannot do. Courts disagree over whether federal law supplies the standard of care in aviation safety.......
  9. Carbon Monoxide Poisoning in Georgia Rental Properties Carbon monoxide has no odor or color, and MedlinePlus lists heating systems, stoves, and gas ranges among its sources. When a tenant is harmed by it in a rented home,......
  10. Dangerous Pharmaceutical Side Effects in Georgia: Drug Injury Lawsuits A patient harmed by a prescription drug's side effect, who believes the label failed to warn of that risk, meets federal law before Georgia law: whether the manufacturer could have......
  11. Filing a Personal Injury Lawsuit in Georgia Superior Court A personal injury case becomes a lawsuit at a precise moment, and several Georgia statutes govern what follows: the filing itself, who may serve the papers and within what time,......
  12. Daycare and Childcare Injury Claims in Georgia A child hurt at a Georgia child care learning center brings two sets of questions: what the state's licensing rules required of the center when the injury happened, and what......
  13. E-Cigarette Explosions in Georgia: Vape Battery Injuries and Product Liability When a vape device overheats, catches fire, or explodes and injures the person carrying or using it, the claim begins with who can be sued and on what theory. Georgia's......
  14. Nominal Damages in Georgia: When Winning Means Almost Nothing Georgia law allows a verdict that finds a defendant liable but awards only a token amount. The damages statute provides for nominal damages where the injury is small or the......
  15. Inadequate Lighting and Parking Lot Crimes in Georgia Whether a poorly lit parking lot supports a claim after a robbery or assault depends first on the date of the crime. Georgia enacted a negligent security statute in 2025......
  16. Suing a Hospital for Employee Negligence in Georgia Whether a hospital answers for the person who harmed a patient depends first on who employed that person. Georgia law lets a hospital that follows a notice statute avoid liability......

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *