Georgia’s “substantially similar” crime rule can make negligent security claims harder to prove, but it does not prevent every claim. Senate Bill (SB) 68 created new statutory requirements that connect foreseeability to specific prior crimes, geographic proximity and the property owner’s actual knowledge. These requirements and the evidence supporting them are central to evaluating claims filed after the law took effect.
What makes a prior crime “substantially similar”?
Georgia’s SB 68 requires a clear link between a prior crime and the later incident. The earlier crime must show a similar risk. General crime rates in the area are not enough to prove foreseeability. Location also matters. A qualifying crime may have occurred on the property, on nearby property or within 500 yards. Under SB 68, the owner must have had actual knowledge of the prior crime. Constructive knowledge, such as general awareness that crime occurs in the area, is not sufficient under the statute.
When the same perpetrator is involved, foreseeability may be supported if the property owner had actual knowledge of the perpetrator’s prior similar conduct and a plaintiff can show by a preponderance of the evidence that the owner had reason to believe the perpetrator would return to the property. A prior crime alone does not establish liability.
How the rule changes the evidence needed in a negligent security claim
Georgia’s new negligent security rules make clear evidence more important. A claimant must show a substantially similar prior crime, the owner’s knowledge and a link between a known security problem and the injury.
Key evidence may include:
- Police reports and 911 records: These records can show prior crimes and what the property owner knew.
- Surveillance and security logs: These records can show earlier incidents and security problems.
- Property records: Maintenance and repair records can show known defects in gates, locks, lighting, cameras or other security features.
Evidence should show similar prior crimes, connect the property condition to the injury and establish whether reasonable security could have prevented the harm. Promptly identifying and preserving incident reports, security logs and maintenance records can prevent evidentiary gaps that may be difficult to address later.
What keeps negligent security claims viable
SB 68 imposed stricter requirements for establishing foreseeability in Georgia negligent security claims, but claims may still remain viable when the facts support them. For incidents occurring on or after the law’s effective date, a property owner’s liability may depend on evidence of prior similar crimes, actual knowledge and a documented physical condition that increased the risk of harm.