O.C.G.A.
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.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act.”
History
Ga. L. 1961, p. 68, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 3.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Proving motor vehicle title. - Ga. L. 1961, p. 68, § 1 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-3-1 et seq.) provides an additional method whereby title to motor vehicles can be proven but does not change the existing law as to the manner in which ownership of chattels, including automobiles, can be proven. Rome Bank & Trust Co. v. Bradshaw, 143 Ga. App. 152, 237 S.E.2d 612, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2221 (1977). Purpose of chapter. - Ga. L. 1961, p. 68, § 1 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-3-1 et seq.) is a recording statute; the statute’s purpose is to perfect and give notice of security interests, and it does not affect the creation of the security interest, which remains a matter of contract between the parties. Hallman v. State, 141 Ga. App. 527, 233 S.E.2d 839, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1977 (1977). Failure to comply with chapter. - Failure to comply with Ga. L. 1961, p. 68, § 1 (see now O.C.G.A. § 40-3-1 et seq.) does not nullify contract, but merely effects loss of priority when the rights of
the third parties who complied with those provisions have intervened. Hallman v. State, 141 Ga. App. 527, 233 S.E.2d 839, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1977 (1977). Intervenor’s unrecorded security interest in forfeiture proceeding. - State in a forfeiture proceeding does not occupy the status of a creditor or lienholder so that the security interest of the intervenor, when not properly recorded, is subordinated to it. Hallman v. State, 141 Ga. App. 527, 233 S.E.2d 839, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1977 (1977). Sale held complete without actual passing of certificate. - While a buyer of a motor home on consignment was entitled to summary judgment after the dealer never paid the consignors, when the consignors refused to execute an assignment and warranty of title when the buyer sought those documents, the buyer was also entitled to damages including reasonable attorney’s fees under O.C.G.A. § 40-3-32(a). Smith v. Hardeman, 281 Ga. App. 402, 636 S.E.2d 106, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 1119 (2006).
RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. Uniform Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title and Anti-Theft Act (U.L.A.) § 44.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
16
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case:
State of Ga. v. Banks, 452 S.E.2d 533 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994).
State of Ga. v. Banks, 452 S.E.2d 533 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 12× “[2] The Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act, OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq. "is a recording statute[.”
In Re Graupner, 356 B.R. 907 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 2006).
· cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 40-3-1 to -95 (2004). 50 . Hull v.”
Metzger v. Americredit Fin. Servs., Inc., 615 S.E.2d 120 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “With these rules in mind, we turn to the Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act, OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq. (the “Act”), which provides the exclusive procedure for perfecting a security interest in a motor vehicle in Georgia.”
Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Rozier, 597 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. 2004).
· cites it 2× “The court in Kalter based its decision on Florida’s Certificate of Title statute, but Georgia’s revised Article 9 makes clear that the Georgia Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act (OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq.) does not alter the substantive rights of the parties and thus does not…”
Spoon v. Herndon, 307 S.E.2d 693 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “The failure to comply with the Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act (OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq. (Code Ann. § 68-401a et seq.”
State v. Benton, 699 S.E.2d 767 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “4 Of course, the law recognizes many forms of secured debt, such as when a buyer agrees to return the purchased property to the seller in the event of nonpayment. 5 Under Georgia law, “the only way to create a security interest in a [motor] vehicle is under [Georgia’s Motor…”
Hull v. Transp. Acceptance Corp., 341 S.E.2d 330 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “The question for our consideration is whether the certificate of title provided appellants with constructive notice of appellee’s prior perfected security interest, thereby establishing the security interest as the superior claim.”
First Nat'l Bank v. Atlanta Classic Cars, Inc., 363 S.E.2d 16 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “), OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq., title did not pass from ACC to CBS because ACC retained the MSO; (2) that FNB had sufficient reason to know that CBS did not own the vehicle; and (3) that ACC at least had a perfected security interest in the vehicle that had priority over any security…”
Griswell v. Columbus Fin. Co., 470 S.E.2d 256 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “We reject Zelinski’s spurious contention that the mobile home at issue was his principal dwelling and therefore not subject to personal property foreclosure.”
West v. Vill. Ford-Mercury, Inc., 567 S.E.2d 355 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “8 OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq. 9 See OCGA § 40-3-32 (d); Right Touch, supra; Canal Ins.”
Smith v. Hardeman, 636 S.E.2d 106 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “The Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act, OCGA§ 40-3-1 et seq., is a recording statute whose purpose is “to perfect and give notice of security interests----[T]his does not affect the creation of a property *404 or security interest, which remains a matter of contract between…”
Suntrust Bank v. Atlanta Classic Cars, Inc., 549 S.E.2d 523 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “794, 795 (1) ( 307 SE2d 693 ) (1983), the failure to perfect a security interest in accordance with the Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title Act (OCGA § 40-3-1 et seq.) “does not affect the creation of the security interest, which remains a matter of contract between the parties.”
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.