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

11-2A-101 (2019)

Short title

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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

This article shall be known and may be cited as “Uniform Commercial Code - Leases.”

History

Code 1981, § 11-2A-101, enacted by Ga. L. 1993, p. 633, § 1.

Annotations

Law reviews. For note on 1993 enactment of this article, see 10 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 34 (1993).

For comment, “Electronic Self-Help Repossession and You: A Computer Software Vendor’s Guide to Staying Out of Jail,” see 48 Emory L.J. 1477 (1999).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2A-101.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1994–2016 · leading case: Bo Phillips Co. v. R.L. King Props., LLC, 783 S.E.2d 445 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bo Phillips Co. v. R.L. King Props., LLC, 783 S.E.2d 445 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “” 8 The appellees also argue that BPC and Benn failed to preserve their argument on appeal that, under the Uniform Commercial Code – Leases, OCGA § 11-2A-101 et seq., the creditor of the lessee of goods takes subject to that lease.”
Carter v. Tokai Fin. Servs., Inc., 500 S.E.2d 638 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-2A-101 et seq.” McNatt, supra at 268 (2).”
Di Unif. Servs., Inc. v. United Water Unlimited Atlanta, LLC, 562 S.E.2d 260 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 11-2A-101 et seq. Although it is possible that the parties’ contract was subject to the UCC, inasmuch as this was not argued below or on appeal, we need not address it now.”
Lamar v. Mitsubishi Motors Credit of Am., Inc. (In Re Lamar), 249 B.R. 822 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. §§ 11-2A-101 et seq. (Uniform Commercial Code — Leases) & 11-9-101 et seq.”
Colonial Pac. Leasing Corp. v. McNatt, 486 S.E.2d 804 (Ga. 1997). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-2A-101 et seq.; Ga. L. 1993, p.”
Fin. Sec. Assurance, Inc. v. Tollman-Hundley Dalton, L.P., 165 B.R. 698 (N.D. Ga. 1994). · cites it 2× “, O.C.G.A. § 11-2A-101 et seq. (repeatedly uses term rent in connection with lease of goods); O.”
Jamsky v. HPSC, INC., 519 S.E.2d 246 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “The provisions of §§ 527 and 528 regarding damages available upon default are applicable “(e)xcept as otherwise provided with respect to damages liquidated in the lease agreement (Code Section 11-2A-504) or otherwise determined pursuant to agreement of the parties (Code Sections…”
Summerhill Neighborhood Dev. Corp. v. Telerent Leasing Corp., 528 S.E.2d 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-2A-101 et seq. was enacted by the General Assembly in 1993 to deal with the lease of personal property.”
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.