O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 10-5-20 (2019)

Restrictions on sales of securities

✓ 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

It is unlawful for a person to offer or sell a security in this state unless:

(1) The security is a federal covered security; (2) The security, transaction, or offer is exempted from registration under Code Sections 10-5-10 through 10-5-12; or (3) The security is registered under this chapter.

History

Code 1981, § 10-5-20, enacted by Ga. L. 2008, p. 381, § 1/SB 358.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Complaint survived motion to dismiss. - Defendants’ motion to dismiss was denied, in part, because the cryptocurrency was an unregistered security and defendants’ offer to purchase plaintiff’s home with the cryptocurrency constituted an offer to sell an unregistered se-

curity, thus, the complaint stated a violation of the Georgia Uniform Securities Act, O.C.G.A. § 10-5-1 et seq. Shea v. Best Buy Homes, 533 F. Supp. 3d 1321, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137995 (N.D. Ga. 2021).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2017–2026 · leading case: Wang & Gao Fam. Trust v. TA Partners LLC (N.D. Ga. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wang & Gao Fam. Trust v. TA Partners LLC (N.D. Ga. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 10-5-50 (and presumably O.C.G.A. § 10-5-20 and federal securities law).”
Scott v. Vantage Corp., 295 F. Supp. 3d 433 (D. Del. 2017). “Similar to their claims for violation of O.C.G.A §§ 10-5-20 and 10-5-31, plaintiffs allege sufficient facts for secondary liability.”
Kevin L. Shehee v. Diana Lynch (11th Cir. 2026). “” O.C.G.A. § 10-5-20. Additionally, a claim brought under O.”
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.