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

O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302 (2019)

Law governing perfection and priority of agricultural liens

✓ 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

While farm products are located in a jurisdiction, the local law of that jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of an agricultural lien on the farm products.

History

Code 1981, § 11-9-302, enacted by Ga. L. 2001, p. 362, § 1.

Annotations

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 9302.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases, 1983–2004 · leading case: United States v. Hooks (In Re Hooks), 40 B.R. 715 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Hooks (In Re Hooks), 40 B.R. 715 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1984). · cites it 4× “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302 (Michie 1982). The Court thus must determine whether PCA’s filing on January 21, 1980, occurred within fifteen days of Mr.”
United States v. Hollie (In Hollie), 42 B.R. 111 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1984). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302 (Michie 1982). Having determined that FmHA has a validly perfected security interest in Debtors’ farm equipment and livestock, 7 the Court will turn to the issue of adequate *118 protection.”
Bank of Cave Spring v. Gold Kist, Inc., 327 S.E.2d 800 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “” Under OCGA § 11-9-301 (3), “[a] ‘lien creditor’ means a creditor who has acquired a lien on the property involved by attachment, levy, or the like .”
Goger v. Merchants Bank of Atlanta (In re Feifer Indus., Inc.), 155 B.R. 256 (D. Ga. 1993). · cites it 6× “See O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302(1). “Presentation for filing of a financing statement and tender of the filing fee or acceptance of the statement by the filing officer constitutes filing under this article.”
May v. MacIoce, 409 S.E.2d 45 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “He argues that the evidence demanded a verdict in his favor. May also enumerates as error the trial court’s refusal to allow him to call Higginson’s and Balkcum’s attorney as a defense witness.”
Mitchell v. Ringson, 311 S.E.2d 516 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “Appellant first contends that any obligations were discharged because appellees failed to maintain a perfected security interest in the collateral named in the promissory notes.”
Hill v. Fed. Employees Credit Union, 386 S.E.2d 874 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “See OCGA §§ 11-9-302 (3) (b); 40-3-53. 2. Appellant alleges the trial court erred by granting summary judgment to appellee because questions of fact remain with regard to four issues.”
Gray Murray v. U.S. Bank Trust Nat'l Assoc., 365 F.3d 1284 (11th Cir. 2004). “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302(1). It was effective for a five-year period.”
Chapman v. Avco Fin. Servs. Leasing Co., 387 S.E.2d 391 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Because the trial court did not err in finding the agreement to be a true lease, neither did it err in finding the defendant was not discharged from the obligation as guarantor by plaintiff’s failure to perfect a security interest in the equipment as required by OCGA § 11-9-302.…”
SO. HORIZONS AVIATION v. Farmers & Merchants Bank of Lakeland, 497 S.E.2d 637 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “See generally OCGA §§ 11-9-302; 11-9-303 (1). Southern Horizons asserted its claim of lien in September 1994, after the Bank perfected its security interest.”
Dennis v. W.S. Badcock Corp. (In Re Dennis), 31 B.R. 128 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1983). “§ 11-9-302(l)(d) (Michie 1982). Therefore, Bad-cock’s lien is within the Court’s order and section 1327 is not controlling.”
Lehigh Press, Inc. v. Nat'l Bank, 389 S.E.2d 376 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-9-302 provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] financing statement must be filed to perfect all security interest except .”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— 11-9-302(1) — 2 cases
Goger v. Merchants Bank of Atlanta (In re Feifer Indus., Inc.), 155 B.R. 256 (D. Ga. 1993). “See O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302(1). “Presentation for filing of a financing statement and tender of the filing fee or acceptance of the statement by the filing officer constitutes filing under this article.”
Gray Murray v. U.S. Bank Trust Nat'l Assoc., 365 F.3d 1284 (11th Cir. 2004). “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-302(1). It was effective for a five-year period.”
— 11-9-302(3)(b) — 1 case
In re Chappell, 224 B.R. 507 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998).
— 11-9-302(l)(d) — 1 case
Dennis v. W.S. Badcock Corp. (In Re Dennis), 31 B.R. 128 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1983). “§ 11-9-302(l)(d) (Michie 1982). Therefore, Bad-cock’s lien is within the Court’s order and section 1327 is not controlling.”
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.