
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §10-6A-2, enacted by Ga. L. 1993, p. 376, § 1; Ga. L. 2000, p. 929, § 1.)
- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1993, "General Assembly" was substituted for "general assembly" at the first instance of the term in subsection (a).
- Trial court did not err in dismissing the buyers' action against a real estate company and a real estate agent because any broker-client relationship between them and the company and the agent that could have been created when the agent executed the first purchase and sale agreement as both the buyers' agent and the seller's agent ended when that agreement failed due to a low appraisal, and since the buyers engaged a buyer's agent, the relationship between the company, agent, and buyers was that of broker-customer; in the absence of a written agreement between them, the duties of the company and the agent were those set out in the Brokerage Relationships in Real Estate Transactions Act, O.C.G.A. § 10-6A-5, and although a broker who was engaged only by a seller owed a buyer, who was a "customer" rather than a "client" under the Act, O.C.G.A. § 10-6A-3(8), certain duties in terms of disclosure of information, the buyers' complaint did not aver that the company and agent breached any of those duties. Jones v. Bill Garlen Real Estate, 311 Ga. App. 372, 715 S.E.2d 777 (2011).
Cited in Harrouk v. Fierman, 291 Ga. App. 818, 662 S.E.2d 892 (2008).