O.C.G.A.
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.
When any person who is found to have conducted business in violation of Article 15, 17, or 21 of this chapter is found to have committed said violation against elder or disabled persons, in addition to any civil penalty otherwise set forth or imposed, the court may
SELLING/OTHER TRADE PRACTICES
impose an additional civil penalty not to exceed $10,000.00 for each violation.
History
Code 1981, § 10-1-851, enacted by Ga.
L. 1993, p. 1092, § 2; Ga. L. 2015, p. 1088, § 10/SB 148.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Complaint only need allege one elderly victim. - In an action in which the plaintiff consumer filed a complaint under the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act (FBPA), O.C.G.A. § 10-1-390 et seq., and the Georgia Unfair or Deceptive Practices Toward the Elderly Act, O.C.G.A. § 10-1-850 et seq., and the lender argued for dismissal because the
language of O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851 required conduct directed at more than one elderly person, the argument was rejected; § 10-1-851 required only a showing that FBPA was violated against one elderly person. Kitchen v. Ameriquest Mortg. Co., No. 1:04-CV-2750-BBM, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43937 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 29, 2005).
Notes of Decisions
Brogdon Ex Rel. Cline v. Nat'l Healthcare Corp., 103 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (N.D. Ga. 2000).
“§ 10-1-851. The FBPA does not apply to “[a]ctions or transactions specifically authorized under laws administered by or rules and regulations promulgated by any regulatory agency of this state or the United States.”
Horne v. Harbour Portfolio VI, LP, 304 F. Supp. 3d 1332 (N.D. Ga. 2018).
· cites it 2× “The Harbour Defendants further argue that these Plaintiffs have failed to sufficiently allege their disability as required by UDPTEA.”
Sandra Jackson Sheppard v. Bank of Am., NA, 542 F. App'x 789 (11th Cir. 2013).
“, the unilateral alteration of the repayment terms of her loan — and she therefore failed to state a claim to relief under the FBPA.”
Ledford v. Ebarle Mktg. Servs. Inc. (M.D. Ga. 2025).
· cites it 5× “O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851. The UDPTEA provides additional protections from unfair practices for elderly and/or disabled persons, including a civil penalty of up to $10,000.”
William Hairston v. Sadie T. Montgomery (Ga. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 4× “The trial 17 OCGA § 10-1-851 provides that “[w]hen any person who is found to have conducted business in violation of [FBPA] .”
Strange v. Juice Man (N.D. Ga. 2022).
· cites it 3× “O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851; Horne v. Harbour Portfolio VI, LP, 304 F.”
State of Georgia ex rel. v. Elite Integrated Med., LLC (N.D. Ga. 2021).
· cites it 2× “) According to the State, Defendants’ targeting of vulnerable populations subjects them to additional civil penalties under the GFBPA, see O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851. Procedural Background: Plaintiff State of Georgia filed this lawsuit in Fulton County State Court on September 14, 2020.”
Strange v. Juice Man (N.D. Ga. 2023).
· cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851. There is no evidence GMR was aware of Strange’s disability when it made the illicit telephone call or that its conduct was thereafter repeated.”
Strange v. Juice Man (S.D. Fla. 2023).
“O.C.G.A. § 10-1-851. There is no evidence GMR was aware of Strange’s disability when it made the illicit telephone call or that its conduct was thereafter repeated.”
Strange v. Juice Man (N.D. Ga. 2022).
“§ 10-1-851. Further, Strange paid the $402 filing fee to initiate this action,10 and he is entitled to recover this amount as costs.”
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.