O.C.G.A. § 44-12-69 (2019)
Rights of action of hirer and bailor
For an interference with the possession of the thing hired, the right of action is in the hirer; for an injury to the property and for any interference with his property rights, the bailor has a right of action.
History
Orig. Code 1863, § 2062; Code 1868, § 2065; Code 1873, § 2091; Code 1882,
§ 2091; Civil Code 1895, § 2909; Civil Code 1910, § 3482; Code 1933, § 12-210.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Rights of action given by O.C.G.A. § 44-12-69 to bailor and bailee are concurrent. Lockhart v. Western & Atl. R.R., 73 Ga. 472, 1884 Ga. LEXIS 149 (1884). At common law basis of allowing bailee to recover was possession, not interest. Small v. Wilson, 20 Ga. App. 674, 93 S.E. 518, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 1030 (1917). A mere borrower may maintain an action only for interference with the borrower’s possession; an action for damages for the destruction of the property in which a case should be brought by the owner. Lockhart v. Western & Atl. R.R., 73 Ga. 472, 1884 Ga. LEXIS 149 (1884). Bailee of mule from day to day may maintain action against third person for animal’s death; the bailee may recover the full value of the animal for the use of the owner and any damages to the bailee’s rights of possession incurred by the injury resulting from a tortious act. Marietta Ice & Coal Co. v. Western & Atl.
R.R., 24 Ga. App. 725, 102 S.E. 182, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 488 (1920). Bailor has right of action against third party for damage to bailed property resulting in injury to bailor’s rights of general property or reversion. Cincinnati, N.O. & Tex. Pac. Ry. v. Hilley, 121 Ga. App. 196, 173 S.E.2d 242, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 1170 (1970). Effect of subsequent repair of bailed property by bailee. - A bailor’s right of action against a third party for damage to bailed property is not affected by the subsequent repairing of the bailed property by the bailee, whether gratuitous or not. Cincinnati, N.O. & Tex. Pac. Ry. v. Hilley, 121 Ga. App. 196, 173 S.E.2d 242, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 1170 (1970). Subsequent repair of bailed property by bailee does not affect the grounds or the measure of liability of a third-party tortfeasor by whose neglect the property was damaged. Cincinnati, N.O. & Tex. Pac. Ry. v. Hilley, 121 Ga. App. 196, 173 S.E.2d 242, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 1170 (1970).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 8 Am. Jur. 2d, Bailments, § 205 et seq. C.J.S. 8 C.J.S., Bailments, § 93 et seq.
ALR. Estoppel to assert title to personal chattel by permitting another to use it in his business, 7 A.L.R. 676.
Bailee’s reimbursement of bailor as affecting latter’s right of action against tortfeasor for damaging subject of bailment, 166 A.L.R. 206.
Bailee’s liability for bailor’s expense of recovering stolen subject of bailment, 80 A.L.R.3d 264.