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

O.C.G.A. § 36-62-1 (2019)

Short title

✓ 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

This chapter may be referred to as the ‘‘Development Authorities Law.’’

History

Ga. L. 1963, p. 531, § 1; Ga. L. 1969, p. 137, § 1.

Annotations

Law reviews. - For article discussing industrial development bond financing under Georgia development authority law,

see 14 Ga. St. B. J. 10 (1977). For article surveying developments in Georgia local government law from mid-1980 through mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 187 (1981).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Hay v. Newton County, 246 Ga. App. 44, 538 S.E.2d 181 (2000); Sherman

v. Dev. Auth., 320 Ga. App. 689, 740 S.E.2d 663 (2013).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. - 62 C.J.S., Municipal Corporations, § 1 et seq. 64 C.J.S., Municipal Corporations, §§ 1279, 1280.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2023 · leading case: Sherman v. Dev. Auth., 730 S.E.2d 113 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sherman v. Dev. Auth., 730 S.E.2d 113 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. A bond transaction leasehold estate is created when a local development authority, in accordance with its redevelopment powers, enters into a bond transaction agreement with a private developer of certain real property.”
Haney v. Dev. Auth. of Bremen, 519 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1999). · cites it 4× “[12] See OCGA §§ 36-62-1 to 36-62-13 (1993); see also Odom v.”
Dev. Auth. of DeKalb Cnty. v. State, 684 S.E.2d 856 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× “(“WTLA Act”), on authorities subject to the Development Authorities Law, OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. (“DAL”). Under the provisions of the DAL, DADC was excepted from any referendum requirement arising out of the sale or issuance of bonds.”
Alexander v. MacOn-bibb Cnty. Urban Dev. Auth. & Urban Props. 47, 357 S.E.2d 62 (Ga. 1987). · cites it 4× “III), and OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq., The Development Authorities Law.”
Sherman v. Dev. Auth., 740 S.E.2d 663 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. John S. Sherman, a taxpayer and citizen of Fulton County, appeals from the order of the trial court validating and confirming the bonds and bond security.”
Sherman v. Dev. Auth., 749 S.E.2d 29 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. John S. Sherman appeals from the order of the trial court validating and confirming the bonds and bond security.”
Hay v. Newton Cnty., 538 S.E.2d 181 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. and Ga. Const. of 1983, Art.”
Murphy v. Pearson, 667 S.E.2d 83 (Ga. 2008). · cites it 2× “901), it is not affected by OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq., the “Development Authorities Law.”
Maddox v. Schrader, 492 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. 1997). · cites it 2× “853, the general proscriptions in the Development Authorities’ Law, OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq., regarding county development authorities do not apply.”
Sherman v. Dev. Auth. of Fulton Cnty., 723 S.E.2d 528 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “2 OCGA § 36-62-1 et seq. 3 See OCGA § 36-82-77 (“Any citizen of this state who is a resident of the governmental body which desires to issue such bonds may become a party to the proceedings at or before the time set for the hearing and any party thereto who is dissatisfied with…”
Dev. Auth. of Columbus v. Four Js Fam., Lllp, 798 S.E.2d 15 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “DAC claims that the trial court’s orders are based on an erroneous finding that the Development Authorities Law, OCGA §§ 36-62-1 through 36-62-14 (the “Act”), prohibits DAC from *475 selling real property at less than fair market value except as provided in OCGA § 36-62-6 (a) (7.”
John Sherman v. Dev. Auth. Of (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “The petition sought to create a bond transaction leasehold estate,3 where in consideration for the issuance of the bonds, Lowe’s agreed to transfer fee simple title in the Project to DAFC, and DAFC and Lowe’s agreed to execute a lease agreement under which Lowe’s would have the…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.