The Georgia Court of Appeals has reversed a $345M judgement against four insurers in the Darlington School sexual abuse case. The March 6, 2026 decision comes after more than 10 years of litigation in which Penn Law has provided counsel to the 20 survivors of sexual abuse at the hands of former Darlington teacher, Roger Stifflemire. The decision also calls into question rulings on future insurance claims.

Penn Law’s Statement:

In our view, the court’s ruling departs from long-standing Georgia law governing how insurance contracts are interpreted. For more than a century, Georgia courts have emphasized that insurance policies must be construed based on the actual language written in the contract. 

Here, however, the Court of Appeals categorized the various policies at issue as either “occurrence” or “claims-made” policies and interpreted them based on generalized descriptions of what insurers say those terms are intended to mean, rather than closely analyzing the specific language of each policy. The policies involved in these cases are uniquely written, and they cannot properly be grouped together and interpreted based on broad labels rather than the words the parties agreed to on paper.

We are also disappointed that the court chose to adopt this approach in cases involving survivors of childhood sexual abuse who have endured profound harm and had the courage to come forward. Georgia is widely recognized as having some of the most restrictive laws in the country governing childhood sexual abuse claims. Despite those challenges, these survivors stepped forward to seek accountability and to challenge institutional failures that historically allowed abuse to be hidden or ignored. 

Given that historical context, the complaints alleged alternative theories of liability, including both intentional conduct and negligence, as Georgia law permits. In our view, the Court of Appeals gave insufficient weight to the negligence-based allegations—particularly those focused on what Darlington should have known—and instead analyzed the case as though it turned solely on allegations of actual knowledge.

These survivors have shown remarkable strength throughout years of litigation, and they do not intend to allow this decision to be the final word. They will be asking the Georgia Supreme Court to review the case and address the important legal issues presented.

If the Court of Appeals’ ruling is allowed to stand, it could have significant consequences beyond this case. Many organizations facing similar claims rely on insurance policies that were purchased specifically to provide defense and coverage in situations like these. A ruling that broadly limits coverage under those policies could leave hundreds of insured organizations without the protection they believed they had purchased and, in some circumstances, could lead to bankruptcy proceedings similar to those seen in cases involving the Boy Scouts of America, Catholic dioceses, and other institutions.

At its core, this case concerns whether insurance companies will be required to honor the commitments they made in their contracts. We believe Georgia law has long required insurers to live up to those promises and to properly defend their insureds when claims are brought.

Unfortunately, what should have been a case addressing whether insurers can abandon their insureds by denying both defense and coverage without first seeking a declaratory judgment has instead produced a ruling that may encourage broader denials of coverage. That is a troubling development.

Background

The plaintiffs initially filed suit against the Darlington School beginning in 2017, each alleging that they were sexually abused or otherwise victimized by Roger Stifflemire during their time as students between 1977-1988. Stifflemire was an English teacher at Darlington from approximately 1974-1994. During his tenure, he also served as a dorm parent where he supervised 9th through 12th grade boys.

The plaintiffs alleged that Stifflemire used his authority and influence as a teacher and dorm parent to obtain the plaintiffs’ trust, which he exploited to sexually abuse them. The abuse occurred both on and off campus, including in school dormitories, Stifflemire’s car, as well as off campus on school trips and at a private lake house in Lake Jordan, Alabama. 

In addition to claiming that Darlington negligently employed, retained, and supervised Stifflemire, the plaintiffs further alleged that the school acted negligently in supervising its premises and in selecting Stifflemire to serve as a “dorm parent.” 

In 2022, the 20 individuals reached a settlement with the Darlington School that allowed them to file suit against various insurance companies that wrongfully denied coverage to the school. Following the settlement, the twenty survivors sought damages against the insurers for $345 million.

In 2024, the law firms of Penn Law, LLC and Paul Mones, P.C., jointly representing 20 individuals sexually abused as children at the hands of Roger Stifflemire, a former teacher at the Darlington School in Rome, Georgia, obtained a $345 million judgment in the Superior Court of Floyd County against the insurance companies for the benefit of these twenty former students.

The lawsuit was then appealed by the insurers and the decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals was announced March 6, 2026. The Plaintiffs intend to petition the Supreme Court of Georgia for further review.

By: John Hadden, Attorney, Penn Law

Ethylene oxide is at the center of hundreds of lawsuits across Georgia that link the chemical with a variety of cancers including leukemia, lymphomas, breast cancer, and other tumors. 

The chemical is used for the sterilization of medical equipment and plays a role in the manufacturing of antifreeze, textiles, plastics, detergents, polyurethane foam, and adhesives. 

Despite the serious health risks associated with ethylene oxide, the White House recently removed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) standards to the Clean Air Act titled National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene Oxide Emission Standards for Sterilization Facilities Residual Risk and Technology Review, also known as the EtO Rule. President Trump has removed the EtO Rule for two years beyond the compliance dates. 

We feel this puts Americans who live near sterilization facilities at serious risk for adverse health effects. Besides the increased risk of cancer, long-term exposure can cause irritation of the eyes, skin, nose, throat, reproductive system, and lungs. It can also cause damage to the brain and nervous system (EPA).

In Georgia, BD Bard (now Becton Dickinson) has emitted ethylene oxide (EtO) since 1967,  years before self-reporting of the chemical output was required by the Federal Government in 1987. In the first year of reporting, BD Bard released 76,000 pounds of EtO in Covington, GA. Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division estimated areas near the BD Bard plant had concentrations of the cancer-causing chemical up to 97 times the acceptable level. 

Many residents within a five mile radius of the plant have been living with and breathing this chemical for years and the results are showing. 

The Georgia Comprehensive Cancer Registry finds a significant increase in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (tied to EtO) among men in the zip codes around the BD Bard plant. Breast cancer has also shown peaks in the area. 

Penn Law has filed more than 270 lawsuits representing individuals who worked or lived near the Covington Bard (BD) facility and developed cancer or other serious health effects. The lawsuits seek that the company be held accountable for the danger it placed on its neighbors who have been forced to breathe the toxic air for years. 

BD is not the only Georgia company using ethylene oxide in its medical sterilization processes, nor is it the only one alleged to have wrongfully emitted the chemical into the neighboring community. In 2016, the EPA published the results of a 10-year risk study on ethylene oxide finding the chemical 30 times more likely to cause certain cancers than scientists had previously believed. A report by the EPA, the National Air Toxics Assessment, revealed three areas, including Covington (where the BD facility is located), having increased cancer risk from the chemical. In the area surrounding BD Bard’s Covington facility, it is estimated that ethylene oxide causes approximately 214 cases for every million people exposed. The EPA deems the pollution risk unacceptable when it surpasses 100 cases for every million people exposed to a chemical.

In Smyrna, Sterigenics (a subsidiary of Sotera) uses ethylene oxide in its sterilization facility and is the subject of numerous lawsuits. Similarly, Kendall Patient Recovery (KPR) in Augusta, a division or subsidiary of Cardinal Health, is alleged to have emitted excess ethylene oxide over decades.

Penn Law continues to fight for the citizens impacted by the negligence of these companies. The long-term damage suffered by residents who did nothing wrong but whose lives have forever changed is not acceptable and it is time for those at fault to be held accountable.

By: John D. Hadden, Attorney at Penn Law

In the lead-up to Florida’s tort reform legislation, insurance companies funneled billions of dollars to shareholders and affiliate entities while simultaneously claiming financial losses in the state’s markets, according to a newly revealed study commissioned by the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.

In a Miami Herald article titled “Secret study found Florida insurers sent billions to affiliates while crying poor” reporter Lawrence Mower writes that “executives distributed $680 million in dividends to shareholders while diverting billions more to affiliate companies.” The article also quotes Doug Quinn, Executive Director of the American Policyholder Association, who stated, “These companies are crying poverty in order to raise premiums or justify insolvency: ‘It’s litigation, it’s fraud‘….This is money shifting from their left pocket to the right, and crying poverty while their right pocket bulges.”

In some cases, insurers collapsed while their affiliates—the beneficiaries of these financial maneuvers—thrived.

The study, which was withheld from lawmakers as they debated, and ultimately enacted sweeping tort reform at the insurance industry’s urging, exposes how insurers exploited affiliate companies to shift profits and circumvent state-imposed profit caps. These affiliates charged insurers exorbitant fees for essential services, directly benefiting company executives. Meanwhile, the effects of tort reform continue to reverberate across Florida, making it more difficult for victims of negligence and wrongdoing to seek justice—all while insurance companies reap the rewards.

By Penn Law

The fight over Senate Bill 68 in Georgia is not about justice, fairness, or balancing the civil justice system. Instead, it is about dark money, corporate influence, protecting historic profits, and major conflicts of interest. This bill, which aims to strip Georgians of their constitutional rights in favor of insurance companies and big business, is being propped up by millions in secret funding.

Competitive Georgia: A Secretive Corporate Powerhouse

First, consider Competitive Georgia, a shadowy 501(c)(3) nonprofit with 500 corporate members that has pledged millions of dollars to support SB68. Their justification? The usual misleading buzzwords: “The weaponization and abuse of Georgia’s civil justice system” and “a hostile environment for job creators.” Yet, they provide zero evidence to support these claims – instead relying on the one thing we all agree on as their evidence: insurance premiums are too high. The intentional disconnect is that lawsuits don’t raise your premiums and they know this.

Instead of making their case with facts, they are funding a multimillion-dollar media campaign designed to deceive the public with distorted statistics and outright falsehoods. Expect to see TV commercials, digital ads, and mailers pushing their narrative that SB68 is necessary to “save businesses.” The truth? It is a blatant effort to increase already historic corporate profits at the expense of everyday Georgians.

But what makes Competitive Georgia particularly troubling is its deep ties to Governor Brian Kemp’s office and a powerful law firm that stands to benefit from SB68. The Governor’s Executive Counsel, Sam Hatcher, previously worked at Troutman Pepper Locke, a prestigious silk stocking law firm that shares an address with Competitive Georgia. The CEO of Competitive Georgia, Kade Cullefer, is also the Director of State Affairs at Troutman Strategies, the lobbying arm of Troutman Pepper Locke. That’s right—Competitive Georgia is not some independent advocacy group. It is an extension of one of the most powerful law firms in the state.

And it gets worse. Governor Kemp’s former Executive Counsel, Kristyn Long, just left her position and will begin working as General Counsel for the Georgia Hospital Association on February 14. The Georgia Hospital Association is a major proponent of SB68 and has been lobbying aggressively for its passage. This clear revolving door between government officials and pro-tort reform lobbyists raises serious ethical concerns.

With staff stacked like this, is it really a surprise that Governor Kemp has decided to champion SB68?

PACT: An Out-of-State Money Machine with No Ties to Georgia

As if Competitive Georgia’s influence weren’t enough, another mysterious dark money group has appeared overnight in Georgia: Protecting American Consumers Together (PACT).

Registered in Virginia, PACT pledged $1 million to support SB68 on the very day the Governor announced the bill.

But why would an out-of-state group suddenly care about Georgia’s tort laws? The answer is simple: It’s not about protecting Georgia consumers—it’s about protecting corporate profits.

PACT’s real mission becomes even clearer when you examine its leadership:

· Tim Capowski, a longtime insurance defense lawyer in Florida.

· Paul Renner, the former Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives.

Both of these men helped Florida pass similar tort reform measures in 2023, promising that it would lower insurance premiums and help consumers. But what actually happened?

· Insurance premiums did not go down – they went up.

· Consumers did not benefit.

· The rights of hardworking Floridians and small business owners were stripped away.

Even President Donald Trump has condemned this type of tort reform, calling it “the biggest insurance scam in the history of the world” and “nothing more than an insurance company bailout.”

The Florida Warning: Georgia Is Next If We Don’t Stop SB68

We don’t have to guess what will happen if SB68 becomes law—we only need to look south to Florida, where similar tort reform has already played out:

· Insurance rates remain high despite all the promises of lower costs.

· Injured victims and small businesses have found it harder to hold bad actors accountable.

· Insurance companies are reporting record profits while ordinary people suffer.

If SB68 passes, Georgia citizens will suffer the same fate.

Follow the Money—Not the Rhetoric

SB68 is not about protecting small businesses or consumers. It is about protecting the profits of insurance companies and the corporations that support them. Millions of dollars in dark money from Competitive Georgia and PACT are being used to deceive the public into believing this bill is necessary.

So ask yourself:

· Why are out-of-state groups suddenly interested in Georgia’s tort laws?

· Why are high-powered law firms and lobbyists so deeply embedded in this fight?

· If tort reform in Florida and other states failed to lower insurance premiums, why would it work in Georgia?

We Must Reject SB68 and the Dark Money Behind It

Georgia citizens deserve honest, transparent policymaking—not backroom deals funded by secretive corporate interests. SB68 is a direct attack on your constitutional rights. It is being sold with lies and funded with millions from anonymous donors who do not have your best interests at heart.

Georgians, now is the time to reject this blatant money grab. Contact your representatives. Let them know you see through the deception and won’t be fooled by corporate propaganda.

Say NO to Senate Bill 68. Say NO to dark money. Say YES to protecting Georgia’s hardworking citizens and small business owners.

By Penn Law

Two years ago, it was Florida. Now it’s Georgia’s turn. Insurance companies and big business are coming for your constitutional rights, disguising their attack as “tort reform.” But these so-called reforms are not about justice, fairness, or lowering costs for hardworking Georgians. Instead, they are a calculated effort to further pad corporate profits at the expense of citizens and small business owners.

The latest attack comes in the form of Senate Bill 68 (SB68), the Governor’s bill allegedly designed to lower insurance premiums. But there’s one glaring problem: SB68 does not even address insurance rates—the very reason we are told it is necessary. Instead, this bill weakens your 7th Amendment right to trial by jury, a right our founding fathers fought to enshrine in the Constitution and which is reaffirmed in Georgia’s Constitution.

For everyday Georgians and small business owners, SB68 is a double blow—insurance premiums remain high, and your constitutional rights take a hit.

Even President Donald Trump, not exactly known for favoring lawsuits, has called tort reform “an insurance company bailout” and “the worst insurance scam in history.” He’s right.

A Legal Scam That Must Be Stopped

If SB68 passes, it will erase 292 years of common law in Georgia—laws that have existed since 1733. This bill would create a legal framework that does not exist anywhere in the United States or any other country with a civil justice system. That alone should be enough to sound the alarm.

It will also:

· Prevent you from telling a jury what you want in damages. The purpose of civil litigation is to seek just compensation. Under SB68, you wouldn’t even be allowed to tell the jury what that is. Our law states that damages should be set through the “enlightened conscience” of jurors. Yet, this bill prevents you from informing them—an absurd and unprecedented move.

· Treat homemakers, the elderly, and children as second-class citizens. Those who don’t earn traditional wages—like stay-at-home parents, retirees, or children—will have fewer rights than business executives.

· Create a “lawsuit lottery.” Without clear guidance, jurors will be forced to guess what damages should be, leading to wildly inconsistent and unfair verdicts.

Shielding Bad Actors from Accountability

SB68 doesn’t just make it harder to win lawsuits—it shields wrongdoers from consequences.

This bill removes the ability to penalize defendants who act in bad faith, cause unnecessary trouble, or stubbornly refuse to settle reasonable claims. Insurance companies will face no consequences for dragging out claims and denying rightful payments—if anything, they will be rewarded for it.

Make no mistake: SB68 is an insurance company dream bill. It gives insurers and big business even more power to delay, deny, and defend claims indefinitely, all while maximizing their profits at your expense.

Clogging the Court System with Burdensome Rules

Georgia’s legal system is already complex, but SB68 will make it worse—trials will take two to four times longer, increasing costs and clogging dockets.

This bill will also make hiring expert witnesses mandatory for questions jurors could answer themselves—like whether someone wore a seatbelt in a car accident. These additional costs will price everyday Georgians out of the courtroom, ensuring that justice is only available to the wealthy.

The Truth: Insurance Companies Are Thriving, Not Struggling

Don’t be fooled into thinking insurers need this bill to stay afloat. The truth is, insurance companies have never been more profitable.

In 2023, insurers made $87 billion in profits, and 2024 is shaping up to be even better. Meanwhile, their CEOs collect tens of millions in salaries, while everyday Georgians struggle to get their rightful claims paid.

The numbers tell the real story:

· Georgia’s defense costs for insurance companies are lower than in surrounding states.

· Insurance companies in Georgia pay out less per claim than they do in other states.

Despite these facts, they are still coming for your constitutional rights—because they want more.

This Bill Will Make Your Life Worse

Let’s be clear: If SB68 passes, your life will not improve. Your insurance rates will not drop. Your small business will not be better protected.

The only entities that will benefit from this bill are big business and the insurance industry.

No one chooses to be injured, disabled, or killed in an accident. No one asks to have their life permanently altered by another person’s negligence. I tell people all the time, “You do not want to have to call me, because if you do, something terrible has happened.” Yet, those harmed are now being told they should have fewer rights and fewer options for justice.

Imagine if it were your daughter, son, mother, or father. Would you want fewer legal options? Would you want your lawyer to be restricted in how they can fight for you? Would you want to be forced into a legal system rigged against you?

Reject This Attack on Your Rights

Accountability must apply to everyone—individuals, businesses, and insurance companies alike. SB68 destroys accountability by ensuring that only the wealthy and powerful can afford to seek justice.

This is not just another bill. This is a direct attack on the fundamental rights of every Georgian. We, the people, must stand together and reject this blatant power grab.

Contact your representatives. Tell them that we will not stand by while they strip us of our constitutional rights. Make your voice heard.

Say NO to Senate Bill 68. Say NO to corporate greed. Say YES to protecting Georgia’s hardworking citizens and small business owners.

They are coming for your rights. It’s time to fight back—LOUDLY.

By Penn Law

For years, insurance companies and corporate lobbyists have pushed for so-called civil justice reform in Georgia, claiming that lawsuits and “nuclear verdicts” are driving up insurance costs and harming businesses. The truth is, no such crisis exists. Now, with Senate Bill 68 (SB68), the Governor’s proposed solution, it is clear that this effort is nothing more than a corporate power grab designed to protect insurance industry profits at the expense of Georgia’s citizens. SB68 will not lower insurance premiums, improve healthcare, or create a fairer legal system. Instead, it will strip Georgians of their constitutional rights and make it harder for innocent victims to obtain justice.

The False Premise of Senate Bill 68

One of the primary arguments for SB68 is that it will lower insurance premiums, particularly for car insurance. But this claim falls apart when we examine the real drivers of insurance costs. Industry data shows that litigation is not responsible for rising premiums. Instead, insurance rates are influenced by the number of accidents, the rising cost of vehicle repairs, corporate profit margins, natural disasters, and economic factors like inflation and supply chain disruptions.

Consider this: bodily injury liability coverage—the portion of a policy that pays out if a driver is at fault and injures someone—makes up only 30% of a total premium. Meanwhile, property damage coverage, which includes liability, collision, and comprehensive, accounts for nearly 60%. Why? Because it costs far more to repair a car than to pay for an injury claim. Furthermore, umbrella policies providing $5 million in liability coverage cost as little as $557 per year. If litigation were truly a major cost driver, why would insurers charge so little for such high coverage? The answer is clear: SB68 is not about lowering premiums—it’s about increasing corporate profits.

The Insurance Industry’s Record Profits Tell the Real Story

Despite pushing the myth that restricting lawsuits will lower insurance rates, insurance companies are raking in record profits. In 2023 alone, the insurance industry made over $87 billion in investment profits, with 2024 projected to be even more profitable. Yet, rather than passing those savings to consumers, insurers continue raising premiums while lobbying for laws like SB68 that restrict an injured person’s ability to recover damages.

Insurance companies use a well-known playbook: delay payments, deny claims, and defend their profits at all costs. Data from the industry itself shows that claimants without attorneys are 70% more likely to receive no compensation. This isn’t because their claims lack merit—it’s because insurers make it difficult for victims to recover fair compensation. SB68 will only further enable insurers to deny claims and limit their financial responsibility.

The Myth of a Litigation Crisis

Georgia is not experiencing a litigation crisis. In fact, insurance companies’ own data disproves this narrative. Following the 2024 legislative session, reports showed that the number of claims in Georgia has remained stable when adjusted for population growth. Total payouts for claims have actually declined since 2016, when adjusted for inflation. If litigation were truly driving insurance costs, we would expect claims and payouts to be rising—but the opposite is happening.

Even the “nuclear verdicts” that proponents of tort reform claim are rampant are exceedingly rare. The Georgia Insurance Commissioner’s report found zero nuclear verdicts in personal auto liability cases—which make up the vast majority of insurance claims. In commercial cases, verdicts exceeding $10 million accounted for at most 2% of claims between 2014 and 2023. The reality is that Georgia’s legal system is functioning as it should, ensuring accountability for extreme negligence while keeping verdicts reasonable.

Healthcare and Small Businesses Will Not Benefit

Advocates of SB68 claim that limiting lawsuits will lower healthcare costs and help small businesses. But history proves otherwise. Over the past 30 years, the number of physicians in Georgia has steadily increased, while medical malpractice payouts have declined by over 50%. However, medical malpractice insurance premiums continue to rise. If tort reform were truly the key to lowering healthcare costs, we would have seen those savings passed on to doctors and patients—but we haven’t.

Similarly, small businesses will not see relief from rising insurance costs. Insurance companies set their own premiums, and when tort reform passes, insurers keep the savings instead of lowering rates. In states like Texas, which enacted tort reform years ago, insurance companies continued raising premiums despite restrictions on lawsuits. Georgia’s small businesses should not be deceived into believing that SB68 will help them.

The Erosion of Constitutional Rights

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of SB68 is its direct attack on constitutional rights. The Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to trial by jury, a right also enshrined in Georgia’s Constitution. SB68 undermines this fundamental right by:

· Erasing 292 years of Georgia law going back to 1733.

· Making the trial process more expensive and burdensome for plaintiffs.

· Creating procedural hurdles that benefit corporations over individuals.

Who Benefits from SB68? Not You.

Governor Kemp has made tort reform a priority, but the only real beneficiaries are insurance companies and big business. While insurance executives collect record-breaking bonuses, Georgia’s families, workers, and small businesses will be left with weakened legal recourse when harmed by negligence or misconduct.

Everyday hardworking Georgians must stand together to reject this unjust proposal. The only real crisis is an insurance industry that continues to rake in historic profits while limiting the rights of those they claim to serve.

The Bottom Line: SB68 Is a Corporate Giveaway

SB68 will not lower your insurance rates, will not improve access to healthcare, and will not protect small businesses. What it will do is shield corporations from accountability and make it harder for injured Georgians to seek justice.

We must reject these deceptive measures and demand real reform that puts people over profits. Georgia lawmakers must vote NO on SB68.