O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-9-327 (2019)

Priority of security interests in deposit account

✓ 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

The following rules govern priority among conflicting security interests in the same deposit account:

(1) A security interest held by a secured party having control of the deposit account under Code Section 11-9-104 has priority over a conflicting security interest held by a secured party that does not have control;

(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (3) and (4) of this Code section, security interests perfected by control under Code Section 11-9-314 rank according to priority in time of obtaining control;

(3) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (4) of this Code section, a security interest held by the bank with which the deposit account is maintained has priority over a conflicting security interest held by another secured party; and

(4) A security interest perfected by control under paragraph (3) of subsection (a) of Code Section 11-9-104 has priority over a security interest held by the bank with which the deposit account is maintained.

History

Code 1981, § 11-9-327, enacted by Ga. L. 2001, p. 362, § 1.

Annotations

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 9327.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2008–2008 · leading case: Eleison Composites, LLC v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 267 F. App'x 918 (11th Cir. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Eleison Composites, LLC v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 267 F. App'x 918 (11th Cir. 2008). “” 9 • Composites argues that, because the EAC account receivable was expressly excluded from the UCC, then, neither O.C.G.A. § 11-9-327, rules governing “priority among conflicting security interests in the same deposit account,” nor O.”

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.