O.C.G.A.

11-2A-528 (2019)

Lessor’s damages for nonacceptance, failure to pay, repudiation, or other default

✓ 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

(1) Except 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 11-1-302 and 11-2A-503), if a lessor elects to retain the goods or a lessor elects to dispose of the goods and the disposition is by lease agreement that for any reason does not qualify for treatment under Code Section 11-2A527(2), or is by sale or otherwise, the lessor may recover from the lessee as damages for a default of the type described in Code Section 11-2A-523(1) or 11-2A-523(3)(a), or, if agreed, for other default of the lessee, (i) accrued and unpaid rent as of the date of default if the lessee has never taken possession of the goods, or, if the lessee has taken possession of the goods, as of the date the lessor repossesses the goods or an earlier date on which the lessee makes a tender of the goods to the lessor, (ii) the present value as of the date determined under clause (i) of the total rent for the then remaining lease term of the original lease agreement minus the present value as of the same date of the market rent at the place where the goods are located computed for the same lease term, and (iii) any incidental damages allowed under Code Section 11-2A-530, less expenses saved in consequence of the lessee’s default. (2) If the measure of damages provided in subsection (1) is inadequate to put a lessor in as good a position as performance would have, the measure of damages is the present value of the profit, including reasonable overhead, the lessor would have made from full performance by the lessee, together with any incidental damages allowed under Code Section 11-2A-530, due allowance for costs reasonably incurred and due credit for payments or proceeds of disposition.

History

Code 1981, § 11-2A-528, enacted by Ga. L. 1993, p. 633, § 1; Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 3B-10/SB 65.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 1-1/SB 65, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “(a) This Act shall be known and

may be cited as the ‘Debtor-Creditor Uniform Law Modernization Act of 2015.’ “(b) To promote consistency among the states, it is the intent of the General Assembly to modernize certain existing uniform laws promulgated by the Uniform Law Commission affecting debtor and creditor rights, responsibilities, and rela-

tionships and other federally recognized laws affecting such rights, responsibilities, and relationships.” JUDICIAL DECISIONS Where a lease agreement provided for liquidated damages and set forth a formula to calculate such damages, O.C.G.A. §§ 11-2A-527 and 11-2A-528 did not apply; rather, the more general directives of O.C.G.A. § 11-2A-504, regarding liquidation of damages, were controlling. Carter v. Tokai Fin. Servs., Inc., 231 Ga. App. 755, 500 S.E.2d 638, 1998 Ga. App. LEXIS 527 (1998). Damages liquidated in agreement. - Where a lease financing agreement specifically set forth a formula to calculate damages, O.C.G.A. §§ 11-2A-527 and 112A-528 were not applicable in an action on a deficiency claim arising out of the sale of collateral. Jamsky v. HPSC, Inc., 238 Ga. App. 447, 519 S.E.2d 246, 1999 Ga. App. LEXIS 846 (1999). Erroneous finding or interpretation. - Because the trial court did not

find any material miscalculation of figures in an arbitrator’s award, mistake in the award’s descriptions, or imperfection in the form of the award, but refused to apply O.C.G.A. § 11-2A-529(1)(b), opting instead to apply O.C.G.A. § 11-2A528(1)(ii), it substituted its judgment for that of the arbitrator, in violation of 9 U.S.C. § 11, as to whether a lessor had shown an inability to reasonably dispose of the leased equipment, and it penalized the lessor for not relitigating the issue at the trial court level, which amounted to reversible error. Lanier Worldwide, Inc. v. BridgeCenters at Park Meadows, LLC, 279 Ga. App. 879, 633 S.E.2d 49, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 711 (2006).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2A-528.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2006–2020 · leading case: Lanier Worldwide, Inc. v. Bridgecenters at Park Meadows, LLC, 633 S.E.2d 49 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).
Lanier Worldwide, Inc. v. Bridgecenters at Park Meadows, LLC, 633 S.E.2d 49 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “In reaching this result, the trial court determined that damages should have been calculated under OCGA § 11-2A-528, rather than OCGA § 11-2A-529, and that such calculation did not permit recovery of future lease payments.”
Ultra Grp. of Companies, Inc. v. S & a 1488 Mgmt., Inc. (Ga. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “The corresponding provision for leased goods, OCGA § 11-2A-528 (2), is similar to OCGA § 11-2-708 (2), but we have no cases applying the doctrine based on OCGA § 11-2A-528 (2).”
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.