O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 10-1-684 (2019)

Prohibited agreement provisions

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A lease-purchase agreement shall not contain a provision: (1) Requiring a garnishment of wages or a power of attorney to confess a judgment; (2) Granting authorization to the lessor or a person acting on the lessor’s behalf to unlawfully enter upon the lessee’s premises or to commit any breach of the peace in the repossession of goods; (3) Requiring the lessee to waive any defense, counterclaim, or right of action against the lessor or a person acting on the lessor’s behalf (as the lessee’s agent on the lessor’s behalf or as the lessee’s agent) in collection of payments under the lease or in the repossession of goods; (4) Requiring the lessee to agree not to assert against a lessor or against an assignee a claim or defense arising out of the lease; (5) Requiring any collection or repossession charges in excess of those allowable under Code Section 10-1-7 and applicable court rules; or (6) Providing that the lessee cannot return the leased property to the lessor at the end of any term.

History

Code 1981, § 10-1-684, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 1341, § 1.

Annotations

Law reviews. For article surveying commercial law in

1984-1985, see 37 Mercer L. Rev. 139 (1985).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1986–1986 · leading case: Shamrock Rental Co. v. Huffman (In Re Huffman), 63 B.R. 737 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1986).
Shamrock Rental Co. v. Huffman (In Re Huffman), 63 B.R. 737 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1986). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 10-1-684(6). Debtor argues that her intent was to purchase a stove and that the emphasis of the agreement is on purchase.”
— 10-1-684(6) — 1 case
Shamrock Rental Co. v. Huffman (In Re Huffman), 63 B.R. 737 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1986). “O.C.G.A. § 10-1-684(6). Debtor argues that her intent was to purchase a stove and that the emphasis of the agreement is on purchase.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.