Contingency-fee personal injury law is being fundamentally reshaped in several key states by aggressive tort reform. For firms operating in Florida, Georgia, and Texas, these reforms don’t just change courtroom strategy — they dramatically increase financial risk, cash-flow pressure, and the cost of doing business. That’s where Capital Financing steps in: providing tailored litigation financing to help firms not only survive, but thrive in this new era.

Here’s how the reforms in each state are driving the need for smarter capital solutions — and why Capital Financing is uniquely positioned to help.

Florida: HB 837 and the New Landscape

Florida’s 2023 tort reform law, House Bill 837, represents one of the most significant overhauls to the state’s litigation environment.  Key provisions include:

  • Shortened statute of limitations: General negligence claims must now be filed within two years, down from four.
  • Modified comparative negligence: Plaintiffs who are found 51% (or more) at fault can no longer recover damages (except in some medical-malpractice cases).
  • Elimination of “one-way” attorney’s fees: The law repeals statutes that allowed plaintiffs to recover legal fees in certain insurance cases without being liable for the insurer’s fees.
  • New medical-damage rules: For medical expenses, only the amount actually paid (rather than the billed amount) is admissible in proving past/future medical care.
  • Caps on non-economic damages: In medical malpractice, pain and suffering are now capped at $500,000 (other cases) and $1 million (wrongful death).

What this means for contingency firms in Florida:

  • Cases may settle for lower amounts, particularly in medical-malpractice matters, because of caps on non-economic damages.
  • With more restrictive recovery rules, plaintiffs’ firms may need to invest more heavily in demonstrating economic damages (e.g., lost wages, future care) — increasing case development costs.
  • Shorter deadlines for filing plus the elimination of one-way fee recovery make cash flow more volatile and risky.

Why Capital Financing matters in Florida:

  • Firms need working capital to invest early in high-quality experts, medical documentation, and case-building — especially now that recoverable amounts may be more constrained.
  • Given the tighter financial risk, access to flexible financing can help firms confidently underwrite case expenses, even when the margin of error shrinks.
  • Capital Financing’s model (non-traditional structure, not relying on personal guarantees) is precisely what firms need when bank lending is too rigid or unavailable.

Georgia: The 2025 Tort Reform Wave

In April 2025, Georgia passed a sweeping legislative package via Senate Bill 68 and Senate Bill 69, introducing major reforms to civil litigation.  Some of the most consequential changes for personal injury firms include:

  • Truth-in-Damages rule: Under SB 68, plaintiffs are now restricted to submitting medical bills to the jury based on both what was billed and what was actually paid.
  • No “anchoring” in closing arguments: The law prohibits attorneys from presenting exaggerated non-economic damage benchmarks (e.g., salary of a celebrity) during closing arguments.
  • Bifurcated trials: Parties may request that trials be divided into two phases (liability first, then damages), helping to isolate fault finding from the emotionally charged damages phase.
  • Seatbelt evidence admissible: Defendants can now present evidence that a plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt — which may significantly mitigate damages in auto-accident cases.
  • Regulation of litigation funders: SB 69 mandates registration of third-party litigation funders, restricts their influence over case strategy, and increases transparency in funding agreements.
  • Limit on double attorney’s fees: The reforms close a loophole that allowed plaintiffs’ counsel to recover attorney’s fees twice for the same action.

Implications for contingency firms in Georgia:

  • There may be higher risk and cost in trial: bifurcation and use of seatbelt evidence create more complexity in preparing for jury, increasing expense.
  • The “truth-in-damages” rule may reduce inflated damage awards, making aggressive case development even more essential.
  • Third-party funders are now more regulated, which changes how firms might partner with or rely on them.

How Capital Financing helps in Georgia:

  • Your financing gives firms the runway to staff, develop, and prepare cases fully — even when trial strategy becomes more complex.
  • Because third-party funders are now regulated, many firms will find traditional litigation funding more cumbersome; Capital Financing offers a more tailored, compliant source of capital.
  • Firms can manage pre-trial cash flow burdens (experts, depositions, discovery) without being overly exposed to funding risk or restrictive third-party contracts.

Texas: Caps, Expert Standards & More

Texas has long been a poster state for tort reform, and its laws continue to shape personal injury litigation in very real ways. Key provisions:

  • Caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice: Texas limits non-economic damages (pain, suffering) to $250,000 per provider, and a total of $500,000 when multiple defendants are involved.
  • Punitive damage limits: Punitive (or “exemplary”) damages are capped at the greater of: twice the economic damages plus up to $750,000 non-economic; or $200,000.
  • Expert witness standards: Texas requires stricter qualifications for expert testimony in negligence and medical-malpractice cases, making it more difficult and expensive for plaintiff firms to retain experts.
  • Comparative fault rule: Texas applies a “modified comparative fault”—plaintiffs’ recovery can be reduced based on their share of fault; if their fault is more than 50%, they may be barred from recovery.
  • Pre-suit notice in medical-malpractice cases: Plaintiffs must give written notice and expert report within 120 days of filing; failure can lead to dismissal and possibly paying defendants’ fees.

What this means for contingency firms in Texas:

  • Because non-economic damages are capped, the potential upside in some cases is more limited — increasing the importance of developing economic damages and using expert testimony.
  • Expert costs may rise (or at least become more critical) due to the stricter standards.
  • Procedural burdens (like the pre-suit report requirement) create risk: if the plaintiff missteps, the case may be dismissed, and the firm loses its investment.

Why Capital Financing is essential in Texas:

  • To fund high-quality expert work and rigorous case development despite tighter damage caps.
  • To support firms as they navigate more expensive pre-suit and discovery phases.
  • To provide cash flow that isn’t tied to speculative high-end verdicts but is instead grounded in the real cost and value of building a robust case.

Putting It All Together: The Strategic Role of Capital Financing Across States

Tort reform in Florida, Georgia, and Texas is not just reducing liability risk — it’s fundamentally increasing the financial risk that contingency firms must absorb. With caps, stricter rules, and procedural hurdles, the cost of doing business is rising even as recoverable value becomes less certain.

That’s exactly where Capital Financing becomes a game-changer. Here’s how:

  1. Flexible, litigation-specific capital — not traditional bank debt — allows firms to invest in necessary case development (experts, discovery, depositions) without putting the firm’s balance sheet at risk.
  2. Scalability — as firms take on more cases (or more complex ones), your capital solution scales to match.
  3. Risk mitigation — by easing cash-flow constraints, firms can better absorb delays, invest in stronger litigation strategies, and avoid underfunding cases because of fear of overexposure.
  4. Compliance-friendly — with new regulations (especially around funding in Georgia), Capital Financing provides a structured, transparent alternative that aligns with the evolving legal environment.
  5. Strategic reinvestment — freeing up liquidity means firms can also reinvest in operations: hiring, marketing, tech, and more — all while advancing their core mission of representing injured clients.

Conclusion

Tort reform in Florida, Georgia, and Texas is rewriting the rulebook for personal injury litigation. For contingency firms, the financial stakes have never been higher. But reform doesn’t have to mean retreat.

Capital Financing is uniquely suited to meet this moment. By providing purpose-built litigation capital — tailored to the changing landscape — we empower firms to continue fighting for their clients, building strong cases, and managing cash flow intelligently.

If your firm practices (or plans to practice) in these states, now is the time to consider how you’ll fund the next phase of growth. Tort reform is here — but with the right capital partner, your firm can not only adapt, but lead.