O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 12-3-275 (2019)

Venue and jurisdiction for actions under part

✓ 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

Any action to protect or enforce any rights under this part shall be brought in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, and any action pertaining to validation of any bonds issued under this part shall likewise be brought in such court, which shall have exclusive, original jurisdiction of such actions.

History

Ga. L. 1950, p. 152, § 21; Ga. L. 1960, p. 89, § 1.

Annotations

Law reviews. - For note discussing problems with venue in Georgia, and pro-

posing statutory revisions to improve the resolution of venue questions, see 9 Ga. St. B.J. 254 (1972).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Waiver of immunity to state court actions. - O.C.G.A. §§ 12-3-275 and 12-3-232 waived a state park authority’s immunity to suits in state court but not in federal court. Fouche v. Jekyll

Island-State Park Auth., 713 F.2d 1518 (11th Cir. 1983). Cited in M.A.R.T.A. v. McCain, 135 Ga. App. 460, 218 S.E.2d 122 (1975).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 64 Am. Jur. 2d, Public Securities and Obligations, § 356.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1983–1983 · leading case: Diane FOUCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the JEKYLL ISLAND-STATE PARK Auth., Defendant-Appellee, 713 F.2d 1518 (11th Cir. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Diane FOUCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the JEKYLL ISLAND-STATE PARK Auth., Defendant-Appellee, 713 F.2d 1518 (11th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “This waiver language should be read in conjunction with the provision of O.C.G.A. § 12-3-275, which states: Venue and jurisdiction for actions under part.”

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.