The Court of Appeals of Georgia has denied a defendant's application for interlocutory appeal in Baratian v. Strickland, Case No. A26I0187, leaving intact a State Court of Gwinnett County ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The decision, announced by North Atlanta Injury Law PC, underscores the critical role of diligent service of process in personal injury litigation and provides a measure of clarity for plaintiffs navigating Georgia's demanding service requirements.
The case stemmed from an August 2023 rear-end collision in Gwinnett County. The defendant was cited at the scene, but his defense centered not on liability but on the timing of service. He argued that the plaintiff failed to serve him within the statute of limitation and moved for summary judgment. Under Georgia law, once a defendant raises a service defense after the statute of limitation has expired, the plaintiff must demonstrate she exercised the "greatest possible diligence" in perfecting service. This standard is notoriously strict and often derails otherwise meritorious claims before a court ever reaches the facts.
Following a March 2026 hearing, the State Court of Gwinnett County rejected the motion. The court found that "Plaintiff's evidence demonstrates that Plaintiff exercised the greatest possible diligence, such that service after expiration of the limitations period relates back to the timely filing of Plaintiff's complaint." The defendant then sought interlocutory review, but on May 6, 2026, the Court of Appeals denied the application, leaving the trial court's ruling undisturbed. The matter was subsequently resolved, with terms not disclosed.
The factual backdrop highlights the obstacles plaintiffs can face in locating and serving a defendant. The defendant had recently moved into a subdivided residence near an out-of-state university and had been living there only weeks when suit was filed. When asked directly for his address so he could be served, he provided a street number without the unit designation. Certified mail came back with a postal notice indicating no authorized recipient was available. In response, the firm ran two authorized methods of service concurrently: statutory service through the Georgia Secretary of State under the Nonresident Motorist Act, and personal service through the sheriff's office in the county where the defendant was living. The firm documented work on service every business day from the date of filing until service was confirmed.
"The defense didn't dispute that their client caused the impact," said Travis J. Little, principal attorney at North Atlanta Injury Law. "Their defense was focused on the calendar. Our answer to that was a record of exactly what we did, every business day, until service was perfected — and the court found it sufficient."
The appellate court's denial of review means the trial court's finding stands, reinforcing that thorough, contemporaneous documentation of service efforts can satisfy even Georgia's exacting diligence standard. For personal injury practitioners, the case serves as a reminder that service of process is not a mere formality but a substantive hurdle that can determine the fate of a claim. It also signals that appellate courts may be reluctant to second-guess trial courts' factual findings on diligence when plaintiffs present detailed records.
North Atlanta Injury Law PC is a personal injury firm based in Milton, Georgia, representing individuals and families in automobile and trucking collisions, premises liability, product liability, nursing home negligence, and wrongful death matters throughout the state.
