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

O.C.G.A. § 30-3-8 (2019)

Penalty

✓ 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 person, firm, or corporation who violates this chapter, or who causes another person, firm, or corporation to violate this chapter, or who fails or refuses to comply with any regulation promulgated under this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

History

(Code 1981, § 30-3-6, enacted by Ga. L. 1984, p. 1255, § 1; Code 1981, § 30-3-8, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1995, p. 1302, § 1.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Superior knowledge of owner. - Mere prior use by a disabled person does not give the disabled individual equal knowledge to the owner/occupier of a specific static defect that the regulations and guidelines prohibit as dangerous, when the owner/occupier is under a continuing statutory mandate by O.C.G.A. § 30-3-8 to provide a safe handicap access ramp,

defect-free and compliant with detailed regulations and guidelines to protect the disabled in use of the ramp, and when, in fact, the ramp is non-compliant, creating a static dangerous defect specifically prohibited by the regulations. Val D’Aosta Co. v. Cross, 241 Ga. App. 583, 526 S.E.2d 580 (1999).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2022 · leading case: Val D'Aosta Co. v. Cross, 526 S.E.2d 580 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Val D'Aosta Co. v. Cross, 526 S.E.2d 580 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 8× “This is because OCGA § 30-3-8, with criminal sanctions for non-compliance, mandated compliance with any regulation promulgated under OCGA § 30-3-1 et seq.”
Paul N. Smith & Bernice Smith v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 167 F.3d 286 (6th Cir. 1999). “Ga. Code Ann. § 30-3-8 . Any provision affording greater access than required by federal law is to be fully effective.”
Anthony Gilchrist v. Meldi Sub, LLC (Ga. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “This is because OCGA § 30-3-8, with criminal sanctions for non-compliance, mandated compliance with any regulation promulgated under OCGA § 30-3-1 et seq.”
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.