Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 2-1-4 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 2-1-4 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 2-1-4

TITLE 2 AGRICULTURE

Section 1. General Provisions, 2-1-1 through 2-1-6.

2-1-4. Anti-siphon devices for irrigation systems; rules and regulations as to such devices; hearings on violations; administrative and judicial review; filing of final order; payment of penalty.

  1. Any irrigation system which is designed or used for the application of fertilizer, pesticide, or chemicals must be equipped with an anti-siphon device adequate to protect against contamination of the water supply. Such anti-siphon device shall consist of a check valve and low pressure drain in the irrigation supply line located between the irrigation pump and the point of injection of fertilizer, pesticide, or chemicals. Any system which complied with the law in effect on January 1, 1982, shall be deemed to be in compliance with the provisions of this subsection.
  2. It shall be unlawful for any person to use any irrigation system designed or used for the application of fertilizer, pesticide, or chemicals, which system is not equipped as required by this Code section.
  3. The Commissioner shall make and publish in print or electronically such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to carry out this Code section, which rules and regulations are not inconsistent with this Code section. Such rules and regulations may specify requirements to be met by anti-siphon devices and the placement of such devices to provide adequate protection.
  4. The Commissioner, in order to enforce this Code section or any orders, rules, and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, may issue an administrative order imposing a penalty not to exceed $1,000.00 for each violation whenever the Commissioner, after a hearing, determines that any person has violated any provision of this Code section, or any regulation or order promulgated hereunder. The hearing and any administrative review thereof shall be conducted in accordance with the procedure for contested cases under Chapter 13 of Title 50, the "Georgia Administrative Procedure Act." Any person who has exhausted all administrative remedies available and who is aggrieved or adversely affected by a final order or action of the Commissioner shall have the right of judicial review thereof in accordance with Chapter 13 of Title 50. All penalties recovered under this Code section shall be paid into the state treasury. The Commissioner may file in the superior court wherein the person under order resides, or, if the person is a corporation, in the county wherein the corporation maintains its principal place of business, or in the county wherein the violation occurred, a certified copy of a final order of the Commissioner unappealed from, or of a final order of the Commissioner affirmed upon appeal, whereupon such court shall render judgment in accordance therewith and notify the parties. Such judgment shall have the same effect, and proceedings in relation thereto shall thereafter be the same, as though such judgment has been rendered in a suit duly heard and determined by such court. The penalty prescribed in this Code section shall be concurrent, alternative, and cumulative with any and all other civil, criminal, or alternative rights, remedies, forfeitures, or penalties provided, allowed, or available to the Commissioner with respect to any violation of this Code section or any orders, rules, or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.

(Ga. L. 1981, p. 1256, §§ 1-4; Ga. L. 1982, p. 1232, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1984, p. 22, § 2; Ga. L. 1989, p. 14, § 2; Ga. L. 2010, p. 838, § 10/SB 388.)

Cross references.

- Control of water pollution and surface-water use, § 12-5-20 et seq.

Wells and drinking water, § 12-5-70 et seq.

Cases Citing Georgia Code 2-1-4 From Courtlistener.com

Total Results: 20

In the Matter of Michael Frederick Greene

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-12-10

Snippet: believe that Greene violated Rules 1.2 (a),1 1.3,2 1.4 (a) (3) and (4),3 1.5 (a),4 1.16 (d),5 and 3.26

In THE MATTER OF JOHN L.G. HERBERT, JR. (Four Cases)

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-10-01

Snippet: pursued.” 2 1.4,2 Rule 1.5 (a),3 Rule 1.15 (I) (a),4 Rule 1.15 (I)

In THE MATTER OF JOHN L.G. HERBERT, JR. (Four Cases)

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-10-01

Snippet: pursued.” 2 1.4,2 Rule 1.5 (a),3 Rule 1.15 (I) (a),4 Rule 1.15 (I)

In the Matter of Nevada Michael Tuggle

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-09-04

Snippet: facts amounted to viola- tions of Rules 1.1,1 1.3,2 1.4 (a),3 1.16 (d),4 and 8.4 (a) (4)5 in SDBD No. 7212

In the Matter of Ephraim L. Michael

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-05-29

Snippet: Michael admits that he violated Rules 1.2 (a),2 1.4 (a),3 and 5.3 (b).4 Citing the American Bar Association

In re West

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-03-20

Citation: 300 Ga. 777, 798 S.E.2d 219, 2017 WL 1052669, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 182

Snippet: Investigative Panel found possible violations of Rules 1.2,1.4, and 8.4 (a) (4). West, however, admits only to

In re Koehler

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-10-05

Citation: 297 Ga. 794, 778 S.E.2d 218, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 688

Snippet: that Koehler had committed violations of Rules 1.2, 1.4, 3.1, 3.3, 4.4, and 8.4 (a) (4) of the Georgia

in the Matter of Paul R. Koehler

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-10-05

Snippet: that Koehler had committed violations of Rules 1.2, 1.4, 3.1, 3.3, 4.4, and 8.4 (a) (4) of the Georgia

Bowden v. the Medical Center, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-06-15

Citation: 297 Ga. 285, 773 S.E.2d 692, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 436

Snippet: regulations as provided in Code Section 31-7-2.1. 4 After the trial court granted Bowden’s

In re Minsk

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-11-03

Citation: 296 Ga. 152, 765 S.E.2d 361, 2014 Ga. LEXIS 891

Snippet: Panel which found that Minsk had violated Rules 1.2,1.4,1.7, 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.1, 4.4 and 8.4 of the Georgia

in the Matter of Stephen L. Minsk

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-11-03

Snippet: Panel which found that Minsk had violated Rules 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.1, 4.4 and 8.4 of the Georgia

In re Anthony

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2012-01-23

Citation: 290 Ga. 436, 721 S.E.2d 901, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 191, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 91

Snippet: Anthony’s disbarment for his violations of Rules 1.3,2 1.4,3 7.3 (d),4 and 9.35 in connection with the grievance

In Re Ricks

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2011-04-18

Citation: 710 S.E.2d 749, 289 Ga. 136, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 1291, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 283

Snippet: Ricks[1] wherein he admits violating Rules 1.3,[2] 1.4[3] and 1.16(a)(2) and *750 (d)[4] of the Georgia

Judicial Council of Ga. v. BROWN & GALLO

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-11-22

Citation: 702 S.E.2d 894, 288 Ga. 294, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3799, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 889

Snippet: from its definition of "agency" in OCGA § 50-13-2(1)[4] did not include the Council and the Board because

In the Matter of Morrey

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-09-20

Citation: 700 S.E.2d 382, 287 Ga. 819, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3023, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 618

Snippet: State Bar alleged that Morrey violated Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.7(a), and 3.1(a) and (b), all of the Georgia

Klardie v. Klardie

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-07-05

Citation: 697 S.E.2d 207, 287 Ga. 499, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 2175, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 509

Snippet: B.R. 612 (2010). See also OCGA § 44-13-100 (a) (2.1).4 Nor has he demonstrated that the wife misled or

Knott v. Knott

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2003-11-17

Citation: 589 S.E.2d 99, 277 Ga. 380, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 3381, 2003 Ga. LEXIS 1009

Snippet: debt is notice ... to the world"). [3] OCGA § 13-2-1. [4] Irvin v. Laxmi, Inc., 266 Ga. 204, 205, 467 S

Lewis v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1999-04-12

Citation: 515 S.E.2d 382, 270 Ga. 891

Snippet: Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). [3] OCGA § 24-2-1. [4] Chandler v. State, 261 Ga. 402, 407, 405 S.E

Maxwell v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1992-03-19

Citation: 414 S.E.2d 470, 262 Ga. 73, 92 Fulton County D. Rep. 19, 1992 Ga. LEXIS 226

Snippet: should have been excluded pursuant to OCGA § 24-2-1. 4. Appellant contends that the trial court erred

Kelley v. Integon Indemnity Corp.

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1984-09-06

Citation: 320 S.E.2d 526, 253 Ga. 269, 1984 Ga. LEXIS 897

Snippet: "accidental bodily injury" as defined in OCGA § 33-34-2 (1)[4] "arising out of the operation, maintenance, or