O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-2-76 (2019)

Who may file objections or cross-action to petition

✓ 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

Any person, whether notified or not, may become a party to the proceeding for the purpose of filing objections to the granting of the relief prayed for in the petition or any part thereof either by filing in court an answer showing that he claims some interest in the premises and stating the grounds of his objection or by filing a cross-action praying that the title to the land or some interest therein be decreed to be in him and be registered accordingly.

History

(Ga. L. 1917, p. 108, § 18; Code 1933, § 60-206.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Objectors having no interest in the land are without authority to contest the right of the applicant to a decree of registration of title in the applicant’s name. Asbury v. McCall, 202 Ga. 154, 42 S.E.2d 370 (1947); McCook v. Council, 202 Ga. 313, 43 S.E.2d 317 (1947). Finding which is unexcepted to is binding. - When the final report of the examiner in a land registration case recited that the evidence did not disclose that the objectors had any interest in the land, and such finding was unexcepted to, the report became

binding upon all parties to the litigation. Asbury v. McCall, 202 Ga. 154, 42 S.E.2d 370 (1947); McCook v. Council, 202 Ga. 313, 43 S.E.2d 317 (1947). Finding against one contestant does not entitle other to decree. - Finding against one of two contestants, each seeking the benefits of The Land Registration Act and a decree of title, does not entitle the other to a decree in that person’s favor. Thomasson v. Coleman, 176 Ga. 375, 167 S.E. 879 (1933). Cited in Lankford v. Holton, 187 Ga. 94, 200 S.E. 243 (1938).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 66 Am. Jur. 2d, Registration of Land Titles, § 18.

C.J.S. - 76 C.J.S., Registration of Land Titles, § 9.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case: Sea Island Co., LLC v. Jane Fraser (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).
Sea Island Co., LLC v. Jane Fraser (Ga. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “24 protection of those interests, see OCGA § 44-2-76, it does not follow that Fraser may rely on her purported easements to initiate such proceedings under OCGA § 44-2-63.”
AA OK, LTD. v. City of Atlanta, 632 S.E.2d 633 (Ga. 2006). · cites it 2× “The City answered, and objected to the petition in accordance with OCGA § 44-2-76. Pursuant to OCGA § 44-2-101, the trial court referred the case to an examiner.”
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.