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.
In this title unless the statutory context otherwise requires: (1) Words in the singular number include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular; and (2) Words of any gender also refer to any other gender.
History
Code 1933, § 109A-1-106, enacted by
Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1; Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 3A-1/SB 65.
Annotations
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 11 Am. Jur. 2d, Bills and Notes, § 19. 12
Am. Jur. 2d, Bills and Notes, § 627. 15A Am. Jur. 2d, Commercial Code, §§ 17, 24.
67A Am. Jur. 2d, Sales, § 987. C.J.S. 2 C.J.S., Actions, §§ 5, 9. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 1106. ALR. Damages for breach by seller or former
employee of covenant, express or implied, not to engage in like business or enter employment of competitor of covenantee, 127 A.L.R. 1152. Awarding damages for delay, in addition to specific performance, of contract for sale of corporate stock, 28 A.L.R.3d 1401.
Notes of Decisions
Unique Designs, Inc. v. Pittard Mach. Co., 409 S.E.2d 241 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “” The adoption of the “lost volume dealer” rule is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Uniform Commercial Code — to fairly compensate “lost profit dealers” so that they will be put in as good a position as if the other party had fully performed.”
Emmons v. Burkett, 353 S.E.2d 908 (Ga. 1987).
· cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-1-106 expressly prohibits penal damages, and provides that the remedies provided by the UCC should be liberally administered so that the aggrieved party “may be put in as good a position as if the other party had fully performed.”
Fid. Nat'l Bank v. Kneller, 390 S.E.2d 55 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “” OCGA § 11-1-106 (1). OCGA § 11-4-402 limits compensation to actual damages for wrongful dishonor “when” it is due to mistake, but says nothing about punitive damages for dishonor arising from wilful or intentional conduct.”
Latex Equip. Sales & Serv., Inc. v. Apache Mills, Inc., 484 S.E.2d 274 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “855, 858 (2) ( 353 SE2d 908 ) (1987); see OCGA § 11-1-106. (a) Latex Equipment’s contention that increased operating expenses do not qualify as incidental damages under OCGA § 11-2-715 is without merit.”
Malley Motors, Inc. v. Davis, 359 S.E.2d 394 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-1-106 (1). Decided June 22, 1987 Rehearing denied July 9, 1987 Robert B.”
White Cnty. Bank v. Noland Co., 449 S.E.2d 325 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-1-106 (1) provides that “[t]he remedies provided by this title shall be liberally administered to the end that the aggrieved party may be put in as good a position as if the other party had fully performed but neither consequential or special or penal damages may be…”
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.