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

O.C.G.A. § 4-8-30 (2019)

Confiscation by dog control officer; payment of costs for recovery; euthanasia

✓ 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

(a) A dangerous dog or vicious dog shall be immediately confiscated by any dog control officer or by a law enforcement officer in the case of any violation of this article. A refusal to surrender a dog subject to confiscation shall be a violation of this article.

(b) The owner of any dog that has been confiscated pursuant to this article may recover such dog upon payment of all reasonable confiscation and housing costs and proof of compliance with the provisions of this article, unless such confiscation is deemed to be in error by a dog control officer, an authority, as defined in Code Section 4-8-23, or a probate court. All fines and all charges for services performed by a law enforcement or dog control officer shall be paid prior to owner recovery of the dog. Criminal prosecution shall not be stayed due to owner recovery or euthanasia of the dog.

(c) In the event the owner has not complied with the provisions of this article within 14 days of the date the dog was confiscated, such dog shall be released to an animal shelter, as such term is defined in Code Section 4-14-2, or euthanized in an expeditious and humane manner. The owner may be required to pay the costs of housing and euthanasia.

History

(Code 1981, § 4-8-30, enacted by Ga. L. 2012, p. 1290, § 4/HB 685; Ga. L. 2014, p. 371, § 3/SB 290.)

Annotations

The 2014 amendment, effective July 1, 2014, inserted "dog" near the beginning of the first sentence of subsection (a); in subsection (b), in the first sentence, inserted "all" near the middle and added ", unless such confiscation is deemed to be in error by a dog control officer, an authority, as defined in Code Section 4-8-23, or a probate court" at the end; and, in subsection (c), substituted "14 days" for "20 days" near the middle and substituted "shall be released to an animal shelter, as such term is defined in Code Section 4-14-2, or euthanized in an expeditious and humane manner. The owner" for "shall be destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner and the owner" near the end. See Editor's notes for applicability.

Editor's notes. - Ga. L. 2014, p. 371, § 6/SB 290, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "This Act shall become effective on July 1, 2014, and shall apply to all violations and confiscations which occur on or after that date."

Law reviews. - For article on the 2012 enactment of this Code section, see 29 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 180 (2012).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Cited in Wyno v. Lowndes County, Ga. , S.E.2d (Feb. 18, 2019).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR. - Liability for injuries inflicted by dog on public officer or employee, 74 A.L.R.4th 1120.

Landlord's liability to third person for injury resulting from attack on leased premises by dangerous or vicious animal kept by tenant, 87 A.L.R.4th 1004.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1996–2019 · leading case: Wyno v. Lowndes Cnty., 824 S.E.2d 297 (Ga. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wyno v. Lowndes Cnty., 824 S.E.2d 297 (Ga. 2019). · cites it 20× “In this case, Jason Wyno challenges the constitutionality of former OCGA § 4-8-30, a portion of the Responsible Dog Ownership Law which purports to exempt local governments and their employees from liability arising from their enforcement of, or failure to enforce, that law and…”
Wyno v. Lowndes Cnty., 305 Ga. 523 (2019). · cites it 18× “In this case, Jason Wyno challenges the constitutionality of former OCGA § 4-8-30, a portion of the former Dangerous Dog Control Law which purports to exempt local governments and their employees from liability arising from their enforcement of, or failure to enforce, that law…”
Jason Wyno v. Lowndes Cnty., 771 S.E.2d 207 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 30× “As detailed below, we affirm the dismissal of the action against the county and its employees in their official capacities pursuant to the version of the Responsible Dog Ownership Law then in effect, former OCGA § 4-8-30 (2012). As to the action against the employees in their…”
Griffiths v. Schafer, 478 S.E.2d 625 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “The provisions of OCGA § 4-8-30 that “the owner of a dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog shall be solely liable for any injury to or death of a person caused by such dog” does not impose absolute liability on the owner of a dog who has bitten before.”
Jason Wyno v. Lowndes Cnty., No. A18A1357 (Ga. Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2018). · cites it 10× “The County Employees moved to dismiss the lawsuit arguing that, among other things, the complaint was barred under OCGA § 4-8-30 (2012) of Georgia’s Responsible Dog Ownership Law.”
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.