# Georgia 9-11-9.1 Expert Affidavit Record Review > Page-cited record review for Georgia O.C.G.A. §9-11-9.1 expert affidavits — the file read in full before the affidavit is filed with the complaint. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/georgia-certificate-of-merit/ --- NewWe now read the actual MRI and CT imaging — not just the radiologist's 1-page report. [See how →](https://medrecords.ai/product/imaging/) [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) › — Georgia Expert Affidavit GEORGIA CERTIFICATE OF MERIT RECORD REVIEW ## The affidavit files with the complaint. There is no discovery to fix it later. Georgia certificate of merit record review services prepare the page-cited record an expert reads before swearing the affidavit O.C.G.A. §9-11-9.1 requires. Every encounter and finding is indexed to its source page, so the negligent act and the factual basis the affidavit has to specify rest on a file that has actually been read. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=georgia-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Record review · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · pre-filing record set 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### The affidavit has to name an act and a factual basis. We do not build for a case type until we can name the standard that defines a correct output and the person who grades the file against it. In merit screening, both are written into the rule itself. The standard and the referee The rulebook - O.C.G.A. §9-11-9.1(a), which requires an affidavit of an expert competent to testify, filed with the complaint, setting forth specifically at least one negligent act or omission and the factual basis for each such claim - O.C.G.A. §9-11-9.1(b), the narrow exception where the period of limitation will expire within ten days of filing, which buys forty-five days rather than removing the requirement - O.C.G.A. §24-7-702(c), which governs who is competent to give expert testimony on the standard of care - O.C.G.A. §9-11-9.1(e), which requires the defendant to raise a defect by motion with the answer or waive it The referee - The trial court on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the express consequence the statute names - The Georgia appellate courts, which have read the specificity requirement strictly - The affiant, an expert competent to testify, who has to identify the act and the facts behind it under oath Expert hours reading the chart before a complaint can be filed at all Flat 10¢/page here, duplicates free Record review · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet — 342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicated — logged Encounter chronology — Built from the produced record — cited Findings and imaging — Each result at its source page — cited Records referenced, not produced — Named in the chart, absent from the file — flagged Review delivered · cited 100% · no negligence opinion offered How it works ### 3 steps between the records and the affidavit. 01 #### Send the record set Hospital charts, office notes, imaging and operative reports, nursing records and billing, in any format. 02 #### We return the review, page-cited The encounter chronology, findings and documented course of treatment, each line citing the page it came from, with referenced-but-absent records flagged. 03 #### Your expert swears the affidavit The negligent act or omission and the factual basis §9-11-9.1(a) requires are the expert's, sworn by the expert, and filing is counsel's decision. The boundary, in writing ### A record review, never a sworn affidavit. We index and cite what the record documents. We do not identify a negligent act or omission, assess the standard of care, or draft or swear an affidavit under §9-11-9.1. The statute requires an expert competent to testify, and the specificity it demands is theirs to supply under oath. Subsection (b) is a forty-five day reprieve, not an exemption, and it only reaches complaints filed within ten days of the limitation period expiring. Planning around it is a worse strategy than reading the file in time. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12 — Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packets — system 08:31 — 11 pages deduplicated — system 08:44 — p.140 flagged — wrong patient — system 08:54 — Record review complete · review complete · chronology cited · cited 100% — system 09:20 — Record review reviewed · citations verified — reviewer 09:26 — Record review exported · affidavit sworn and filed off-platform — reviewer Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery Why Medrecords AI ### The rules the platform never breaks. EVERY LINE CITED CASE #IME-4812 · ADAMS, T. 342 pp 2/14 — ER visit, right knee p.4 4/18 — arthroscopic surgery p.61 p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Medrecords AI Read every page · cite every line #### HIPAA, under a signed BAA Every file is handled under our Business Associate Agreement, from the first byte. #### Never trains a model Your records are never used to train any AI model — ours or anyone else's. #### Every line cited If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every sentence links to its source page. #### Deleted after delivery Files are deleted 30 days after delivery, with a full audit log of every access. Powered by the platform ### 4 capabilities behind every record review. The record review is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Every page read in full — hospital charts, office notes, nursing flowsheets, handwritten records — nothing skipped, nothing guessed. IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology The course of care builds itself into one timeline, so the act the affidavit has to specify sits in visible sequence. IN ACTION · first presentation → injury → current treatment, one continuous timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every line of the review links to the page range behind it. IN ACTION · review → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports The review formats straight into the expert's working file — your template, your letterhead. IN ACTION · record review → affidavit-ready ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) FAQ ### Georgia expert affidavits, answered. No. The statute requires an affidavit of an expert competent to testify, setting forth at least one negligent act or omission and the factual basis for it. That is sworn testimony and it belongs to the expert. We prepare the page-cited record review they read first. No. Identifying the act and its factual basis is exactly what §9-11-9.1(a) assigns to the affiant. The review carries the documented encounters, findings and sequence, each cited to a page, and leaves the characterisation to the expert. Where the period of limitation will expire within ten days of filing and time constraints prevented preparing the affidavit, the contemporaneous filing requirement is relaxed and the affidavit follows within forty-five days. It is a narrow exception, not a general extension. No. Medrecords AI does not retrieve records from providers or facilities. You bring the records you already have — review starts in minutes from upload. Retrieval vendors take days; you can keep yours and still cut the review to minutes. The statute names dismissal for failure to state a claim as the consequence when the affidavit is not filed in the periods it specifies. Georgia courts have applied the specificity requirement strictly, which is why the file behind the affidavit matters. ### Send one file. We'll tell you what we can read. No obligation. If the case type is buildable we'll scope it; if it isn't, we'll say so. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=georgia-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/)