O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61 (2019)

Signing of deeds to secure debt and bills of sale

✓ 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

In order to admit deeds to secure debt or bills of sale to secure debt to record, they shall be signed by the maker, attested by an officer as provided in Code Section 44-2-15, and attested by one other witness.

History

Ga. L. 1884-85, p. 124, § 2; Civil Code 1895, § 2773; Civil Code 1910, § 3308;

Ga. L. 1931, p. 153, § 1; Code 1933, § 671302; Ga. L. 2015, p. 937, § 6/HB 322.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Applicability. - There is nothing in O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61 that in any way changes the rules governing the priority of conditional sales contracts and junior judgments; that section applies only to bills of sale to secure debt and security deeds. Parham v. Heath, 90 Ga. App. 26, 81 S.E.2d 848, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 618 (1954). Unwitnessed paper. - In the absence of fraud, a deed which on its face complies with all statutory requirements is entitled to be recorded, and once accepted and filed with the clerk for record, provides constructive notice to the world of its existence. Leeds Bldg. Prods. v. Sears Mortg. Corp., 267 Ga. 300, 477 S.E.2d 565, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 920 (1996) (overruling White v. Magarahan, 1891 Ga. LEXIS 132, 87 Ga. 217, 13 S.E. 509 (1891)); Propes v. Todd, 89 Ga. App. 308, 79 S.E.2d 346, 1953 Ga. App. LEXIS 955 (1953). Because no unofficial witness attested to or acknowledged a security deed when debtor signed it, despite the recordation of the deed and a subsequent recordation of a scrivener’s affidavit attesting that the affiant, an attorney, was an unofficial witness to the signing of the deed, under Georgia law, specifically, O.C.G.A. § 4414-61, the deed was unperfected; subsequent assignments of the security deed to a bank and then to the creditor were not

equivalent to a perfected second security deed that acknowledged the first and, thus, did not cure the patent defect in the deed. Wash. Mut. Home Loans v. Yearwood, 318 B.R. 227, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 1965 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 2004). Failure to properly attest security deed failed to provide notice of security interest. - Security deed in favor of a bank was not attested by an unofficial witness as required by Georgia law and was patently defective and, thus, the security deed did not provide constructive or actual notice of any security interest. As an unattested security deed was equivalent to an unrecorded deed under Georgia law, a Chapter 7 trustee, in the trustee’s position as a hypothetical bona fide purchaser of real estate, had the power to avoid the transfer of the improperly attested deed, and the avoided lien was preserved for the benefit of the estate. Flatau v. Ga. Bank & Trust Co. of Augusta (In re Davis), No. 14-30349-JPS, No. 143033, 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 4588 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. Oct. 29, 2014). Unnotarized deed could not be recorded. - Notary was required to place the notary seal on any notarial act, including attestation of the Bank Security Deed, and failure to do so rendered the Bank Security Deed ineligible for recordation because an officer as provided in O.C.G.A.

§ 44-2-15 did not attest to execution of the deed in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 4414-61. To rule otherwise would make the requirements imposed on notary publics under O.C.G.A. § 45-17-6(a)(1) inapplicable to the common notarial act of attesting to a security deed. Kelley v. Thomasville Nat’l Bank (In re Taylor), No. 1670218- JTL, No. 16-07006, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 4202 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. Dec. 7, 2016). Effect of failure to record a mortgage or bill of sale to secure debt “shall be the same as is the effect of failure to record a deed of bargain and sale.” This changes the prior law with reference to those securities so as to render such instruments, even though unrecorded, superior in rank to subsequent liens created by law. Manchester Motors, Inc. v. F & M Bank, 91 Ga. App. 811, 87 S.E.2d 342, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 870 (1955). No priority unless recorded. - Where a bill of sale in its renewed form was for a larger amount than the balance due on the original instrument, in a contest between it and the bill of sale held by the original holder, it would only have had priority in the amount that was still due on the original bill of sale at the time the same was renewed, only it if was properly recorded. Propes v. Todd, 89 Ga. App. 308, 79 S.E.2d 346, 1953 Ga. App. LEXIS 955 (1953). Properly attested adjustable rate rider did not validate improperly attested deed to secure debt; even though rider was incorporated into the terms of the deed, the deed itself remained improperly attested and ineligible for recordation. Stone v. Decatur Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n (In re Fleeman), 81 B.R. 160, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 1958 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1987). Security deed was improperly attested where it did not bear the signature of either an unofficial witness or a notary public, and recordation of the document was therefore ineffective to give actual or constructive notice. Updike v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 93 B.R. 795, 1988 Bankr. LEXIS 2041 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1988). Attestation of security deed. - First sentence of O.C.G.A. § 44-14-33 and the

statutory recording scheme indicate that the word “duly” in the second sentence of § 44-14-33 should be understood to mean that a security deed is “duly filed, recorded, and indexed” only if the clerk responsible for recording determines, from the face of the document, that it is in the proper form for recording, meaning that it is attested or acknowledged by a proper officer and (in the case of real property) an additional witness; the General Assembly chose to enact the 1995 amendment to O.C.G.A. § 44-14-33 not as a freestanding Code provision but as an addition to a Code provision clearly referenced by O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61, and the General Assembly is presumed to have been aware of the existing state of the law when the legislature enacted the 1995 amendment so the placement of the amendment makes complete sense. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Gordon, 289 Ga. 12, 709 S.E.2d 258, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 271 (2011). Because an eight-paged security deed lacked the signature of an unofficial witness, the deed was not in recordable form as required by O.C.G.A. § 44-14-33 and did not provide constructive notice, therefore, the security deed was avoidable under 11 U.S.C. § 544 with regard to a debtor’s bankruptcy. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gordon, 292 Ga. 474, 749 S.E.2d 368, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 158 (2013). Affidavit signed by a notary testified to both execution and attestation of a security deed and, thus, substantially complied with the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 44-2-18 to cure any defect in attestation under O.C.G.A. §§ 44-14-33 and 44-14-61 caused by the notary’s signature appearing under the term “acknowledgement.” As the affidavit cured the defect, the security deed was eligible for recordation under Georgia law, and its recordation provided constructive notice to a subsequent bona fide purchasers and, thus, a bankruptcy trustee could not use the trustee’s strong-arm powers to avoid the security deed. Kelley v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Perry), 565 B.R. 442, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 256 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 2017). Deed reference as notice of prior improperly attested deed. - Reference in a properly attested and recorded secu-

rity deed to a prior improperly attested and therefore “unrecorded” security deed provided notice of the existence of the first security deed. Updike v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 93 B.R. 795, 1988 Bankr. LEXIS 2041 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1988). Rescission had no legal effect. - While the rescission was signed by two

witnesses and notarized in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61, there was no evidence of the grantor conveying such an interest. Thus, the rescission had no legal effect. Mak v. Argent Mortg. Co., LLC, No. 1:07-cv-02806-JOF, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84746 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 15, 2009).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 55 Am. Jur. 2d, Mortgages, §§ 89, 90. C.J.S. 59 C.J.S., Mortgages, §§ 110, 111. ALR. Imputation to attesting witness of notice of contents of instrument, 4 A.L.R. 716.

Effect of purported subscribing witness’s denial or forgetfulness of signature by mark, 17 A.L.R. 1267. Sufficiency of certificate of acknowledgment, 25 A.L.R.2d 1124.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1987–2023 · leading case: U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Gordon, 709 S.E.2d 258 (Ga. 2011).
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Gordon, 709 S.E.2d 258 (Ga. 2011). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 44-14-61 provides that “[i]n order to admit deeds to secure debt .”
Gordon v. Taylor (In Re Taylor), 430 B.R. 305 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2010). · cites it 2× “” O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61. Mortgages and deeds to secure debt are admitted to record when they are “attested by or acknowledged before an officer as proscribed for attestation or acknowledgment of deeds of bargain and sale; and, in the case of real property, a mortgage must also be…”
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gordon, 749 S.E.2d 368 (Ga. 2013). · cites it 2× “OCGA §§ 44-14-61 and 44-14-33. Specifically, OCGA § 44-14-33 provides that a security deed “must be attested by or acknowledged before an officer as prescribed for the attestation or acknowledgment of deeds of bargain and sale; and, in the case of real property, a [security…”
Joan Haynes v. McCalla Raymer, LLC, 793 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir. 2015). “See O.C.G.A. §§ 44-14-61, 44-14-64. Accordingly, they must be acknowledged by an officer (such as a notary) before they may be recorded and provide constructive notice of the assignment to subsequent bona fide purchasers.”
Leeds Bldg. Prods., Inc. v. Sears Mortg. Corp., 477 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. 1996). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 44-14-61 requires that a deed to secure debt be attested in the same manner as a mortgage in order for the deed to be eligible for recordation.”
Us Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Gordon, 709 S.E.2d 258 (Ga. 2011). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 44-14-61 provides that "[i]n order to admit deeds to secure debt .”
Gordon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In Re Codrington), 430 B.R. 287 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2009). · cites it 3× “O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61 provides that “[i]n order to admit deeds to secure debt or bills of sale to record, they shall be attested or proved in the manner prescribed by law for mortgages.”
Sears Mortg. Corp. v. Leeds Bldg. Prods., Inc., 464 S.E.2d 907 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “In order to record a security deed, it must be “attested by or *350 acknowledged before an officer as prescribed for the attestation or acknowledgment of deeds of bargain and sale,” and must also be attested or acknowledged by one additional witness.”
Kelley v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Perry), 565 B.R. 442 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 2017). · cites it 2× “Prior to July 1, 2015, O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61 stated, "In order to admit deeds to secure debt or bills of sale to record, they shall be attested or proved in the manner prescribed by law for mortgages.”
Gordon v. U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n (In Re Hagler), 429 B.R. 42 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61 provides that “[i]n order to admit deeds to secure debt or bills of sale to record, they shall be attested or proved in the manner prescribed by law for mortgages.”
Martin v. CitiFinancial, Inc. (In Re Martin), 387 B.R. 307 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2007). · cites it 2× “I conclude that one cause of action is Code-based: Debtor’s cause of action to declare Citifinancial’s lien unsecured because of the lack of notary seal. Under Georgia law, a deed to secure debt must be attested in the same manner as a mortgage in order for the deed to secure…”
Pingora Loan Servicing, LLC v. Cathy L. Scarver, 30 F.4th 1086 (11th Cir. 2022). “See O.C.G.A. § 44-14-61. That’s likely an oversight, for if anything an acknowledged deed is more trustworthy, not less—the lineage of acknowledgment traces back nearly 500 years to England under Henry VIII.”
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.