AULD v. FORBES (Two Cases)
309 Ga. 893
Ga.2020Background
- 14-year-old Tomari Jackson drowned in Belize on a school trip; his mother, Adell Forbes, filed suit in Georgia for personal injury before death and wrongful death.
- Forbes sued multiple defendants (Monkey Bay, its owner, the school district and chaperones); some defendants asserted immunity; Forbes did not appeal immunity rulings.
- Forbes filed suit March 24, 2017 — after Belize’s one-year limitation in the Belize Law of Torts Act had run, but within Georgia’s two-year wrongful-death limitation.
- The trial court dismissed the claims as time-barred under Belize law; the Court of Appeals reversed, applying Georgia’s two-year statute.
- The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari and held that Belize law governs the wrongful-death claim (lex loci delicti) and that Georgia’s narrow public-policy exception does not require application of Georgia law; it reversed the Court of Appeals on that issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which statute of limitations governs a wrongful-death claim for a death that occurred in Belize? | Forbes: Georgia's two-year wrongful-death statute applies (planning/negligence occurred in Georgia). | Defendants: Belize's one-year limit under its Law of Torts Act governs as the law of the locus delicti. | Belize's one-year limitation applies; wrongful-death cause created by foreign statute is substantive and governed by lex loci delicti. |
| Does Georgia's public-policy exception permit applying Georgia law instead of Belize law? | Forbes: Belize's shorter limitation and different damages contravene Georgia public policy; Georgia law should control. | Defendants: Belize law is not so radically dissimilar; applying it does not violate Georgia public policy. | Public-policy exception is narrow; Belize law is not radically dissimilar and may be applied. |
| Does Georgia's Wrongful Death Act apply extraterritorially so Georgia law can govern this death? | Forbes: Georgia wrongful-death law should apply because some acts were planned in Georgia. | Defendants: Georgia's Wrongful Death Act has no extraterritorial application. | Georgia's Wrongful Death Act does not apply extraterritorially; Georgia law cannot be substituted for a death occurring abroad. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bullard v. MRA Holding, LLC, 292 Ga. 748 (2013) (Georgia follows lex loci delicti for substantive tort law)
- Taylor v. Murray, 231 Ga. 852 (1974) (statutes of limitations generally procedural; exception when foreign law creates a cause of action)
- Tolbert v. Maner, 271 Ga. 207 (1999) (wrongful-death claims are statutory creations, not common-law rights)
- Indon Indus. Inc. v. Charles S. Martin Distrib. Co., Inc., 234 Ga. 845 (1975) (foreign statute that creates cause of action with a shorter limitation is substantive)
- Southern R. Co. v. Decker, 5 Ga. App. 21 (1908) (public-policy exception to lex loci delicti is narrow; requires radical dissimilarity)
- Selma, Rome & Dalton R. Co. v. Lacy, 43 Ga. 461 (1871) (Georgia wrongful-death statute lacks extraterritorial operation)
- Alexander v. General Motors Corp., 267 Ga. 339 (1996) (discusses public-policy application where foreign law conflicts with Georgia policy)