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

O.C.G.A. § 23-3-64 (2019)

Other required evidence

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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 master shall examine the petition, plat, and all documents filed therewith and may require other evidence to be filed, including, but not limited to, an abstract of title.

History

Ga. L. 1966, p. 443, § 4.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Capers v. Camp, 244 Ga. 7, 257 S.E.2d 517 (1979); In re Rivermist Homeowners Ass’n, 244 Ga. 515, 260 S.E.2d 897

(1979); Meadows v. Barker, 241 Ga. App. 753, 526 S.E.2d 643 (1999); Cernonok v. Kane, 280 Ga. 272, 627 S.E.2d 14 (2006).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1999–2015 · leading case: Cernonok v. Kane, 627 S.E.2d 14 (Ga. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cernonok v. Kane, 627 S.E.2d 14 (Ga. 2006). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 23-3-64 provides that, in making his decision, “[t]he master shall examine the petition, plat, and all documents filed therewith and may require other evidence to be filed, including, but not limited to, an abstract of title.”
Meadows v. Barker, 526 S.E.2d 643 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “6 OCGA § 23-3-64; Woelper v. Piedmont Cotton Mills, 266 Ga.”
Smith v. Mitchell Cnty., 779 S.E.2d 410 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “272, 274 (4) ( 627 SE2d 14 ) (2006) (quoting OCGA § 23-3-64). Under these circumstances, not only did the Smiths waive the opportunity to have an oral hearing before the special master, but they also were not prejudiced since they were given notice and an opportunity to respond…”
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.