Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 3-5-5 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 3-5-5 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 3-5-5

TITLE 3 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES

Section 5. Malt Beverages, 3-5-1 through 3-5-90.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

3-5-5. Retail sale of kegs; required labeling; removal of labels.

  1. As used in this Code section, the term:
    1. "Keg" means any brewery-sealed container or barrel containing, by liquid volume, more than two gallons of malt beverage.
    2. "Retail dealer," "retail licensee," or "licensee" means a person holding either a retail dealer license, a permit issued by the commissioner authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption only on the premises for a period not to exceed one day, or a beverage alcohol caterer license.
  2. No person licensed under this chapter shall sell malt beverages at retail by the keg except as provided in subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this Code section. The commissioner may take punitive action against violators, up to and including revocation of the state retail dealer's license of any licensed retail dealer who fails to comply with this Code section. The undertaking of any punitive action allowed under this Code section shall not prohibit criminal prosecution for sale to underage persons.
  3. Each retail licensee selling kegs containing malt beverages for consumption off licensed premises shall require each keg purchaser to present a Georgia driver's license or other proper identification at the time of purchase. The licensee shall record for each keg sale: the date of sale; the size of keg; the keg identification number; the amount of container deposit; the name; address; date of birth of the purchaser; and the form of identification presented by such purchaser. The purchaser shall sign a statement at the time of purchase attesting to the accuracy of the purchaser's name and address, the location where the contents of the keg will be consumed, and acknowledging that a violation of Code Section 3-3-23, as it relates to furnishing alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 years, may result in civil liability, criminal prosecution, or both. The licensee shall retain the identification form and purchaser's signed statement attesting to the accuracy of the purchaser's name and address and acknowledging that a violation of Code Section 3-3-23, as it relates to furnishing alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 years, may result in civil liability, criminal prosecution, or both, for a minimum of six months following the sale of the keg.
  4. Each keg sold at retail for consumption off licensed premises shall be labeled with the name and address of the retail licensee, the keg identification number, and the state alcohol license number of the business. The Department of Revenue will prescribe the form of registration label or tag to be used for this purpose. The registration label or tag shall be supplied by the Department of Revenue without fee and securely affixed to the keg by the licensee making the sale. In addition to the label or tag, the Department of Revenue shall provide guidelines to the licensee on the information to be recorded on the identification form required under subsection (c) of this Code section.
  5. The licensee shall record the date of return of the keg on the identification form required under subsection (c) of this Code section. If there is no label or tag affixed to the keg or if the identification number is not legible, the licensee shall indicate this fact on the identification form required under subsection (c) of this Code section. The licensee shall not refund a deposit for a keg that is returned without the required label or tag and identification number intact and legible.
  6. The removal of the required label shall be unlawful until such time that it is lawfully returned to the retailer by the purchaser. Possession of a keg without the required label and identification number shall be unlawful and subject to penalty pursuant to Code Section 3-3-9.

(Code 1981, §3-5-5, enacted by Ga. L. 2001, p. 1100, § 1; Ga. L. 2002, p. 415, § 3.)

Cases Citing Georgia Code 3-5-5 From Courtlistener.com

Total Results: 20

Wood v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-12-10

Citation: 910 S.E.2d 150, 320 Ga. 466

Snippet: Kramer’s conduct. See Beck, 310 Ga. at 498 (3).5 5 This Court has reserved the question whether

In THE MATTER OF ESTON WILLIAM HOOD, JR. (Two Cases)

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-11-19

Citation: 320 Ga. 440

Snippet: Master concluded that Hood’s violations of Rules 1.3, 5.5 (a), 8.1 (a), 8.4 (a) (4), and 9.3 warranted a

In THE MATTER OF TIMOTHY ORMAN MCCALEP (Two Cases)

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-02-06

Citation: 318 Ga. 260

Snippet: 1.5, 1.15 (I) and (II), 1.16, 3.2, 3.5 (d), 5.3, 5.5, 8.4 (a) (1) and (4), and 9.3. The Special Master

In the Matter of L. Nicole Brantley

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-03-01

Citation: 855 S.E.2d 625, 311 Ga. 61

Snippet: maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.3, 5.5, or 8.1 is disbarment, we agree that the record

Cross v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2020-09-08

Citation: 848 S.E.2d 455, 309 Ga. 705

Snippet: conspirator statements under former OCGA § 24-3-5,5 and he asked 4 We remind litigants that

BLACKWELL v. THE STATE (Two Cases)

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-01-29

Citation: 302 Ga. 820

Snippet: in substance. See Hamilton v. State, 260 Ga. 3, 5 (5) (389 SE2d 225) (1990). Immediately before

Blackwell v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-01-29

Citation: 302 Ga. 820, 809 S.E.2d 727

Snippet: correct in substance. See Hamilton v. State, 260 Ga. 3, 5 (5) (389 SE2d 225) (1990). Immediately before that

In re Fair

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-02-27

Citation: 300 Ga. 655, 797 S.E.2d 490, 2017 WL 772597, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 90

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 5.5 (a), and 8.1 (a) is disbarment, and the maximum

In re Brantley

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2016-10-03

Citation: 299 Ga. 732, 791 S.E.2d 783, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 612

Snippet: maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.3, 5.5, or 8.1 is disbarment, we agree that the record

In re Raulin

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2016-06-20

Citation: 299 Ga. 283, 787 S.E.2d 691, 2016 WL 3390419, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 429

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2,1.3, 5.5, and 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

in the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2016-06-20

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 5.5, and 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

In re Steckbauer

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2013-10-21

Citation: 293 Ga. 893, 750 S.E.2d 363, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 3194, 2013 WL 5708615, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 877

Snippet: evidence and found that Steckbauer violated Rules 5.3, 5.5, 8.4 (a) (1) and 8.4 (a) (4). It also found probable

In the Matter of Wallace

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-06-28

Citation: 696 S.E.2d 660, 287 Ga. 464, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 2075, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 501

Snippet: combination of Rules 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.16, 3.1, 3.3, 5.5, 8.4(a)(4), and 9.3 of the Rules of Professional

In Re Hanes

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2009-04-28

Citation: 676 S.E.2d 167, 285 Ga. 293, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 1489, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 139

Snippet: The maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.3, 5.5 and 8.1 is disbarment, while the maximum sanction

In Re Levy

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2008-07-07

Citation: 664 S.E.2d 195, 284 Ga. 281

Snippet: maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.3, 5.5, 8.1 or 8.4 is disbarment, while the maximum sanction

In re Cohen

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2005-04-26

Citation: 279 Ga. 319, 612 S.E.2d 294, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 1387, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 299

Snippet: alleged that Cohen violated Rules 1.1,1.3,1.4,1.5, 3.3, 5.5, and 8.4 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct

Ray v. Carthen

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2002-09-16

Citation: 275 Ga. 459, 569 S.E.2d 542, 2002 Fulton County D. Rep. 2676, 2002 Ga. LEXIS 634

Snippet: tentative parole month. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 475-3-.05 (5). The tentative parole month serves as a recommendation

Alexander v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1998-12-04

Citation: 509 S.E.2d 56, 270 Ga. 346

Snippet: (1986). ABA Standards For Criminal Justice, 3-5.5 (3d ed. 1993). Thompson v. State, 265 Ga. 677

Copeland v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1996-05-13

Citation: 469 S.E.2d 672, 266 Ga. 664, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 1836, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 233

Snippet: Georgia's co-conspirator hearsay statute, O.C.G.A. § 24-3-5,[5] violated Copeland's right of confrontation. Georgia

Vargas v. Morris

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1996-01-08

Citation: 465 S.E.2d 275, 266 Ga. 141, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 174, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 8

Snippet: based and explainable parole decisions" (Rule 475-3-.05(5) of the Rules of State Board of Pardons and Paroles)