O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-3-73 (2019)

Sufficiency of descriptions of condominium units; description of undivided interest in common elements

✓ 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

After the submission of any property to this article, no description of a condominium unit located thereon shall be deemed vague, uncertain, or otherwise insufficient if it sets forth the identifying number of that unit, the name of the condominium, the name of the county or counties in which the condominium is located, and the deed book and page number where the first page of the declaration is recorded. Any such description shall be deemed to include the undivided interest in the common elements appertaining to such unit even if such interest is not stated or referred to in the description.

History

(Ga. L. 1975, p. 609, § 10.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Description of parking units. - Because a condominium developer had not originally provided the buyers with a legal description of parking units the buyers were buying, but after the seller built the units the buyers notified the seller of their choice of units, the application of O.C.G.A. § 44-3-73 was

not warranted as it would create an incongruous result: the purchase agreement would be enforceable as to the residential unit but unenforceable as to the parking units. Park Regency Ptnrs., L.P. v. Gruber, 271 Ga. App. 66, 608 S.E.2d 667 (2004).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 15A Am. Jur. 2d, Condominiums and Cooperative Apartments, § 7 et seq.

C.J.S. - 52 C.J.S., Landlord and Tenant, § 412 et seq.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2007 · leading case: Park Regency Partners, L.P. v. Gruber, 608 S.E.2d 667 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Park Regency Partners, L.P. v. Gruber, 608 S.E.2d 667 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Ordinarily, OCGA § 44-3-73 would foreclose most challenges to the sufficiency of legal descriptions.”

Anderson v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins., 644 S.E.2d 414 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “2 See also OCGA § 44-3-73. 3 Section 2.03 describes the limited common elements as follows: Supplementing the provisions of [OCGA § 44-3-75], ownership of each Unit shall entitle the owner thereof to the exclusive use of those portions of the Common Elements consisting of (a)…”

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.