O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-8-204 (2019)

Effect of issuer’s restriction on transfer

✓ 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

A restriction on transfer of a security imposed by the issuer, even if otherwise lawful, is ineffective against a person without knowledge of the restriction unless: (1) The security is certificated and the restriction is noted conspicuously on the security certificate; or (2) The security is uncertificated and the registered owner has been notified of the restriction.

History

Code 1981, § 11-8-204, enacted by Ga. L. 1998, p. 1323, § 1.

Annotations

Law reviews. For article, “Restricting the Transfer-

ability of Stock in Georgia Corporations,” see 5 Mercer L. Rev. 242 (1954).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Liability of transfer agent. - The class of persons for whom information regarding restrictions on the transfer of certificated securities was intended, either directly or indirectly, includes, at a minimum, those who regularly buy and sell such securities and those who regularly accept pledges of such securities as collateral for loans, margin accounts and similar transactions; as a result, a brokerdealer’s complaint stated a cause of action for negligent misrepresentation for a transfer agent’s failure to disclose restric-

tions on the transfer of stock certificates. Neidiger/Tucker/Bruner, Inc. v. Suntrust Bank, 242 Ga. App. 369, 530 S.E.2d 18, 2000 Ga. App. LEXIS 197 (2000). Construction with § 11-8-401. - Taken together, O.C.G.A. §§ 11-8-204 and § 11-8-401 require the issuer to register a transfer presented in proper form, even if there were secret restrictions, if the purchaser or pledgee was ignorant of the restrictions. Neidiger/Tucker/Bruner, Inc. v. Suntrust Bank, 242 Ga. App. 369, 530 S.E.2d 18, 2000 Ga. App. LEXIS 197 (2000).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 15A Am. Jur. 2d, Commercial Code, § 87. 18 Am. Jur. 2d, Corporations, § 386.

C.J.S. 18 C.J.S., Corporations, §§ 219-225. 19 C.J.S., Corporations, § 664. 64A C.J.S.,

Municipal Corporations, § 1701 et seq. 81A C.J.S., States, § 186. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 8204. ALR. Constructive notice to purchaser or pledgee of stock of corporation’s lien thereon, 33 A.L.R. 1272. Priority as between lien of corporation and rights of pledgee or bona fide purchaser of corporate stock, 81 A.L.R. 989. Conflict of laws as to title and transfer of corporate stock, 131 A.L.R. 192. Right or duty of corporation to refuse to transfer stock on books to one presenting properly endorsed certificate, because of knowledge or suspicion of conflicting rights of registered holder or of third person, 139 A.L.R. 273; 75 A.L.R.2d 746. Uniform Stock Transfer Act as appli-

cable to shares in savings and loan associations or building and loan associations, 143 A.L.R. 1152. Valuation of property for purposes of estate, succession, or gift tax as affected by contract or bylaw specifying price at which property may or must be sold, purchased, or offered, 5 A.L.R.2d 1122. Construction and effect of § 15 of Uniform Stock Transfer Act prohibiting restriction on transfer of shares unless such restriction is stated on the certificate, 29 A.L.R.2d 901. What constitutes waiver of stockholder’s or corporation’s right to enforce firstoption stock purchase agreement, 55 A.L.R.3d 723. Restrictions on transfer of corporate stock as applicable to testamentary dispositions thereof, 61 A.L.R.3d 1090.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Neidiger/Tucker/Bruner, Inc. v. Suntrust Bank, 530 S.E.2d 18 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000).
Neidiger/Tucker/Bruner, Inc. v. Suntrust Bank, 530 S.E.2d 18 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 12× “r general negligence; (2) a claim for negligent misrepresentation for SunTrust’s failure to note the transfer restrictions on the certificates and its failure to disclose restrictions in response to the telephone inquiry; (3) a claim for conversion for SunTrust’s refusal to…”
Taylor v. Riverside-Franklin Props., Inc. (In Re Taylor), 228 B.R. 491 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). · cites it 2× “See also O.C.G.A. § 11-8-204. Here, Movant admits that the restriction contained in the 1986 agreement was not noted at all on the front or back of Debtor’s stock certificate.”
Equitymax, Inc. v. Parkway Law Grp. LLC (N.D. Ga. 2026). · cites it 4× “In any event, the Neidiger court found SunTrust, a “professional” sued for negligently preparing a stock certificate, owed a duty to the plaintiff, a third party, because O.C.G.A. § 11-8-204 and O.C.G.A. § 11-8-406 imposed a “specific [statutory] duty on those who prepare and…”
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.