O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-12-62 (2019)

Duties of hirer; liability for acts of bailor’s agents

✓ 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

(a) The duties of the hirer of things are: (1) To put the thing to no other use than that for which it is hired; (2) To take ordinary care in its use; (3) To redeliver the thing at the expiration of the bailment; and (4) To comply generally with the terms of the hiring. (b) If the bailor sends his own agents with the thing bailed, the hirer shall not be liable for the acts of such agents but shall only be liable either to the bailor or to third persons for the consequences of his own directions and for gross neglect.

History

Orig. Code 1863, § 2060; Code 1868, § 2063; Code 1873, § 2089; Code 1882, § 2089; Civil Code 1895, § 2907; Civil Code 1910, § 3480; Code 1933, § 12-203.

Annotations

Cross references. Theft by conversion, § 16-8-4.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Lessee of personal property is termed bailee for hire. Goger v. United

States, 4 B.R. 4, 1980 Bankr. LEXIS 5427 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1980).

Hirer is bound only for ordinary diligence in a contract of mutual benefit and is responsible only for ordinary negligence, or for that degree of care and diligence which the generality of mankind use in keeping their own goods of the same kind. Malone v. Robinson, 77 Ga. 719, 1886 Ga. LEXIS 390 (1886); Evans & Pennington v. Nail, 1 Ga. App. 42, 57 S.E. 1020, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 144 (1907); Brannan & Holder v. Moore, 135 Ga. 517, 69 S.E. 820, 1910 Ga. LEXIS 19 (1910). Bailee’s control and responsibility is limited in respect to conduct of servant furnished to operate chattel. Hill Aircraft & Leasing Corp. v. Simon, 122 Ga. App. 524, 177 S.E.2d 803, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 931 (1970). Where the plaintiff leased an airplane to the defendant, and sent with the airplane a co-pilot employed by the plaintiff, and the airplane was subsequently damaged due to a steering mechanism malfunction, the evidence created a jury question as to the plaintiff’s contributory negligence, and the plaintiff was not entitled to a directed verdict. Jet Air, Inc. v. EPPS Air Serv., Inc., 194 Ga. App. 829, 392 S.E.2d 245, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 362 (1990), cert. denied, No. S90C0892, 1990 Ga. LEXIS 767 (Ga. May 16, 1990). Owner of vehicle who employs driver is responsible for driver’s negligence, rather than the hirer where the hirer has no supervision or control of the servant’s mechanical operation of the vehicle and no right to discharge the driver and take over the operation of the vehicle personally or put it in the hands of another to operate. Montgomery Trucking Co. v. Black, 231 Ga. 211, 200 S.E.2d 882, 1973 Ga. LEXIS 645 (1973). Liability of party hiring crane for operator’s negligence. - For a discussion of the liability of a hirer of a crane for the negligence of the crane operator in lifting a concrete hopper, see Sims Crane Serv., Inc. v. Ideal Steel Prods., Inc., 750 F.2d 884, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 27533 (11th Cir. 1985). Because a contract between a crane owner and a general contractor stated that the owner’s employee was a borrowed servant, a trial court correctly granted summary judgment in a negligence action

arising from injuries resulting from the crane operation. Tim’s Crane & Rigging, Inc. v. Gibson, 278 Ga. 796, 604 S.E.2d 763, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 950 (2004). Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the Georgia Ports Authority on the issue of liability in its breach of contract action against a lessee because neither the parties’ contract for the lease of a gantry crane, nor the other evidence before the trial court, established that a crane operator was the lessee’s borrowed servant as a matter of law under O.C.G.A. § 44-12-62(b). Cooper/T. Smith Stevedoring Co. v. State of Ga., 317 Ga. App. 362, 730 S.E.2d 168, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 705 (2012), cert. denied, No. S12C2016, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 34 (Ga. Jan. 7, 2013), cert. denied, No. S12C2023, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 51 (Ga. Jan. 7, 2013). Liability of employer for tractor carrying trash. - Because an employer, as bailor, sent the employer’s own employee with the thing bailed, a tractor with attached trash trailer, under O.C.G.A. § 44-12-62(b), a contractor, as the hirer, was liable only for the consequences of the hirer’s own directions or for the hirer’s gross negligence; the trial court erred in concluding that the contractor was entitled to summary judgment on the basis that the employee was not a borrowed servant because the evidence presented at least a factual issue regarding whether the employee was the contractor’s borrowed servant since there was evidence that the contractor alone supervised the employee’s work hauling debris, that the contractor controlled the employee’s schedule for each day, and that the contractor dictated which landfill would receive the debris and when a load was ready. Coe v. Carroll & Carroll, Inc., 308 Ga. App. 777, 709 S.E.2d 324, 2011 Ga. App. LEXIS 280 (2011), cert. denied, No. S11C1159, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 836 (Ga. Oct. 17, 2011). Status as employee or servant genuine issue of material fact. - Whether a backhoe operator remained an employee of the defendant contractor or became a servant of the plaintiff’s employer upon renting the backhoe from the defendant is a genuine issue of material fact. Mitchell v. Burden Bros., 126 Ga.

App. 75, 189 S.E.2d 909, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1051 (1972). RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 8 Am. Jur. 2d, Bailments, § 83 et seq. C.J.S. 8 C.J.S., Bailments, § 31. ALR. Relation between customer and broker receiving bonds or other securities for sale or exchange, 52 A.L.R. 501. Liability of bailee for damage to or destruction of subject of bailment by servant acting for his own purposes or in violation of his instructions, 52 A.L.R. 711.

Duty and liability of fair association, or other bailee, as regards articles entrusted to it for exhibition or display, 139 A.L.R. 931. Who is member of the immediate family within automobile lease provision restricting use of rented automobile to customer and members of his immediate family, 80 A.L.R.3d 1170. Liability of owner or bailor of horse for injury by horse to hirer or bailee thereof, 6 A.L.R.4th 358.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc. v. Gibson, 604 S.E.2d 763 (Ga. 2004).
Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc. v. Gibson, 604 S.E.2d 763 (Ga. 2004). · cites it 6× “The borrowed servant doctrine in Georgia, particularly in conjunction with the hiring of equipment or other personal property, is rooted in statutory law: If the bailor sends his own agents with the thing bailed, the hirer shall not be liable for the acts of such agents but…”
Coe v. Carroll & Carroll, Inc., 709 S.E.2d 324 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 8× “1 OCGA § 44-12-62 (b) provides that “[i]f [a] bailor sends his own agents with the thing bailed, the hirer shall not be liable for the acts of such agents but shall only be liable either to the bailor or to third persons for the consequences of his own directions and for gross…”
Cooper/T. Smith Stevedoring Co. v. State, 730 S.E.2d 168 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 6× “The GPA claimed that the crane operator was the borrowed servant of CTS and that because CTS was responsible for the operation of the crane, it was liable for its replacement under the Tariff.”
Reliance Ins. v. Bridges, 311 S.E.2d 193 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “, supra, together with former Code § 12-203 (now OCGA § 44-12-62 (a), effective November 1, 1982) which provides: “The engagements of the hirer of things are, to put the thing to no other use than that for which it is hired; to take ordinary care in its use; to redeliver at the…”
Statham v. Quang, 915 S.E.2d 864 (Ga. 2025). · cites it 24× “6 6 In Tim’s Crane & Rigging, a bailor’s employee performed negligently while working for a bailee, and we considered whether the bailor could be held vicariously liable for his employee’s negligence under OCGA § 44-12-62 (b), which provides: If the bailor sends his own agents…”
Jet Air, Inc. v. Epps Air Serv., Inc., 392 S.E.2d 245 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Thus, the trial court did not err in charging the law of OCGA § 44-12-62 (b). (“If the bailor sends his own agents with the thing bailed, the hirer shall not be liable for the acts of such agents but shall only be liable either to the bailor or to third persons for the…”
Gold Cross EMS, Inc. v. Child.'s Hosp. of Alabama, 79 F. Supp. 3d 1316 (S.D. Ga. 2015). · cites it 2× “” O.C.G.A. § 44-12-62(b); see also Underwood v.”
cooper/t.smith Stevedoring Co. v. State of Ga (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “The GPA claimed that the crane operator was the borrowed servant of CTS and that because CTS was responsible for the operation of the crane, it was liable for its replacement under the Tariff.”
— 44-12-62(b) — 2 cases
Coe v. Carroll & Carroll, Inc., 709 S.E.2d 324 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). “1 OCGA § 44-12-62 (b) provides that “[i]f [a] bailor sends his own agents with the thing bailed, the hirer shall not be liable for the acts of such agents but shall only be liable either to the bailor or to third persons for the consequences of his own directions and for gross…”
Gold Cross EMS, Inc. v. Child.'s Hosp. of Alabama, 79 F. Supp. 3d 1316 (S.D. Ga. 2015). “” O.C.G.A. § 44-12-62(b); see also Underwood v.”
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.