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

O.C.G.A. § 44-14-268 (2019)

Motion for dissolution of writ; payment of claim or furnishing of bond; procedure upon dissolution of writ

✓ 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) At any time within which the defendant may file defenses as provided for under Code Section 44-14-267, the defendant may: (1) Move for a dissolution of the writ, which motion shall be granted unless the petitioner proves the grounds upon which the writ was issued; or (2) Pay to the court the full amount of the petitioner’s claim, including costs, or furnish a bond with good and sufficient security for the value of the property as determined after hearing by the court before which the matter is pending or a bond for the amount of petitioner’s claim, including costs, whichever is less. (b) If the writ is dissolved under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) of this Code section, the action shall proceed on the petitioner’s claim as if no writ had issued; and any issue requiring trial shall be had in accordance with the procedure prescribed for civil actions in courts of record.

History

Code 1933, § 67-716, enacted by Ga. L. 1975, p. 1213, § 3.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS A defendant may regain possession of repossessed property at that time which defendant pays into court the full amount of petitioner’s claim including costs or furnishes a proper bond. Sumner v. Adel Banking Co., 244 Ga. 73, 259 S.E.2d 32, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1120 (1979). Defendant is entitled to trial on defenses to foreclosure and counterclaims whether defendant retains possession un-

der O.C.G.A. § 44-14-268(a) or whether defendant gives it up. Ward v. Charles D. Hardwick Co., 156 Ga. App. 96, 274 S.E.2d 20, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2893 (1980). Error to rule on merits of foreclosure while ostensibly determining merits of writ of immediate possession. Ward v. Charles D. Hardwick Co., 156 Ga. App. 96, 274 S.E.2d 20, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2893 (1980).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 14 C.J.S., Chattel Mortgages, §§ 236238. ALR. Right of mortgagee lawfully in posses-

sion, or one entitled to his rights, to retain possession until debt is paid, although debt or right to foreclose is barred by limitation, 115 A.L.R. 339.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1987–2002 · leading case: Stanley v. Hart, 562 S.E.2d 186 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stanley v. Hart, 562 S.E.2d 186 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “Hart also moved to dissolve the writ of possession pursuant to OCGA § 44-14-268, claiming *259 that Stanley had failed to provide him with notice of default or time to cure it, as required by the agreement.”
Deutz-Allis Credit Corp. v. Phillips, 360 S.E.2d 29 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 6× “The action was a claim against the bond posted by Sheriff Phillips pursuant to OCGA § 15-16-5, on which Gulf was the surety, and against Clenney as surety ori a bond under OCGA § 44-14-268 (a) (2). The action grew out of another Miller County Superior Court action, #1299, which…”
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.