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

O.C.G.A. § 44-6-171 (2019)

Setting aside judgment by parties under disability, absent, or not notified; time limitations; conclusiveness of judgment; effect of proceedings on bona fide purchaser

✓ 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

When proceedings have been instituted and judgment of the partition has been rendered according to the regulations prescribed in this part and if any one of the parties in interest is a minor or a mentally ill or retarded person who has no guardian, or is absent from the state during such

proceeding, or has not been notified thereof, such minor or mentally ill or retarded person may, within 12 months after coming of age, after restoration of mind, or after having a guardian appointed, as the case may be, and such absent or unnotified party may, at any time within 12 months after rendition of the judgment, move the court to set aside the judgment on any of the grounds upon which a party notified and free from disabilities might have resisted the judgment upon the hearing as authorized by Code Section

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2018–2018 · leading case: Faison v. Faison, 811 S.E.2d 431 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Faison v. Faison, 811 S.E.2d 431 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Accordingly, we do not address Appellants' argument that the trial court committed harmful error in failing to find that she was intellectually disabled within the meaning of OCGA § 44-6-171.”
Daryl Faison v. Lora Lynn Faison (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Accordingly, we do not address Appellants’ argument that the trial court committed harmful error in failing to find that she was intellectually disabled within the meaning of OCGA § 44-6-171. 8”
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.