Rent means money.

- General Assembly in giving tenants the right to remain in possession during the pendency of a dispossessory proceeding by tendering the payment of rent into court intended "rent" to mean "money." Lipshutz v. Shantha, 144 Ga. App. 196, 240 S.E.2d 738 (1977).

Repair receipts as rent.

- While valid receipts for repairs are a defense to the merits of a dispossessory action, repair receipts do not constitute payment of rent within the contemplation of this statute. Lipshutz v. Shantha, 144 Ga. App. 196, 240 S.E.2d 738 (1977) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54).

Order of court.

- No bond or payment of rent need accompany the defendant's answer, although the alleged tenant may be required to pay rent into the registry of the court by order of the court. Cloud v. Groves, 135 Ga. App. 50, 217 S.E.2d 381 (1975).

Removal to federal court.

- Even though Georgia courts have held that dispossessory actions were not civil actions, a dispossessory action filed by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation was properly removed to federal court under a Weems analysis since: (1) dispossessory actions were tried before a magistrate court, which was a regular judicial tribunal and required notice and service; (2) a dispossessory action was comparable to a civil trial if the tenant answered under O.C.G.A. § 44-7-53(b): and (3) rent was an issue of pecuniary value in a dispossessory action under O.C.G.A. §§ 44-7-52(a),44-7-53(b), and44-7-54. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Matassino, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1276 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 3, 2012).

Tenant in possession pending litigation.

- Tenant may be allowed to remain in possession of the premises pending the final outcome of the litigation provided that at the time of the tenant's answer the tenant pays rent into the registry of the court. Marshall v. U.S. Mgt. Corp., 149 Ga. App. 141, 253 S.E.2d 818 (1979).

After the magistrate court ruled against the tenant and the tenant appealed the decision to the superior court and, without order, paid all rent due into the registry of that court, the tenant was entitled, under the provisions of O.C.G.A. §§ 44-7-54 and44-7-56, to remain in possession of the premises until the litigation was concluded. Green v. Barton, 237 Ga. App. 553, 515 S.E.2d 864 (1999).

Under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-60(h), the law of the case had been abolished and did not bind the trial court to the court's interim ruling ordering the wife of a mortgagor to pay rent into the registry of the court pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(a)(1) during a continuance of the lender's dispossessory action. Harper v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 305 Ga. App. 536, 699 S.E.2d 854 (2010).

Answer not conditioned on payment.

- Filing of a bond or payment of rent into court is not a condition precedent to filing an answer and counterclaim. McKisic v. College Park Hous. Auth., 134 Ga. App. 813, 216 S.E.2d 369 (1975).

Effect of failure to pay into registry.

- If a tenant fails to pay into court the rent and failed to post supersedeas bond as required by the order of a lower court, the court properly entered an order giving landlords immediate possession. Mitchell v. Excelsior Sales & Imports, Inc., 243 Ga. 813, 256 S.E.2d 785 (1979); Mitcham v. Reese, 190 Ga. App. 689, 379 S.E.2d 637 (1989).

Generally, a tenant's failure to pay into the registry determines only the tenant's right to remain on the premises pending determination of the other issues. Leverette v. Moran, 153 Ga. App. 825, 266 S.E.2d 574 (1980).

While the trial court, in dispossessory proceedings, did not err in awarding possession to the landlord upon the tenants' failure to make a payment of purported arrearages into the registry of the court, the court did err in dismissing the tenants' counterclaim, which the tenants had an unqualified right to submit. Moran v. Mid-State Homes, Inc., 171 Ga. App. 618, 320 S.E.2d 625 (1984).

There was no error in granting a writ of possession to a landlord in an action between the landlord and tenant over a disputed lease with an option to purchase since the tenant had been ordered to make the lease payments into the court registry and the tenant had defaulted on making two timely payments, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(b). Burnett v. Reeves, 258 Ga. App. 846, 575 S.E.2d 747 (2002).

Tenant, who was sued by a landlord and was making the tenant's rental payments to the court, breached a commercial lease when the tenant failed to pay the full amount of an additional payment that was due at the end of the year, and the appellate court held that the trial court was required, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(b), to grant the landlord's request for a writ of possession while the case was still pending because the tenant breached the lease. Vinings Jubilee Partners, Ltd. v. Vinings Dining, Inc., 266 Ga. App. 34, 596 S.E.2d 209 (2004).

Money judgment improper.

- Nothing in § 44-7-53 or this section provides for, or was consistent with, the entry of a money judgment against the defendant upon the defendant's failure to pay rent into the registry of the court. Jelks v. World of Realty, Inc., 153 Ga. App. 720, 266 S.E.2d 357 (1980).

Lessee estopped from denying existence of valid contract.

- Defendant lessee was estopped, given the lessee's prior representations, from denying the existence of a valid contract with the plaintiff lessor and that the rent money the lessee paid into the court's registry was a matter of controversy for purposes of O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(c). The lessee's obligation to pay rent existed wholly apart from any right to damages arising from the lessor's alleged breach. McDonald Georgia Commerce Ctr. 400, LLC v. F & C Logistics, Inc., F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Ga. Feb. 19, 2013).

No payment to landlord of sums received.

- Court declined to order payment to a landlord of any of the sums received from the defendants, a tenant and the tenant's parent company, under O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(c), because all of the sums the landlord requested were in controversy because the defendants asserted counterclaims for breach of contract and fraud against the landlord for allegedly failing to deliver on promises of railroad access for the property in question and, as a result of the alleged breach, the defendants denied that the defendants owed the landlord rent for two months. McDonald Ga. Commerce Ctr. 400, LLC v. F & C Logistics, Inc., F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Ga. Jan. 2, 2013).

Effect of interim order on terms of lease.

- Trial court's interim order, which required payment of rent into the registry of the court on the first business day of each month, did not materially alter the terms of the lease, which specified that the tenant would not be considered in default of the tenant's obligation to pay rent until 30 days after receiving notice that rent was past due. The lease provision in question clearly did not extend the date on which rent was to be considered due but merely qualified the landlord's right to institute dispossessory proceedings against the tenant based on a failure to pay rent. Diplomat Restaurant, Inc. v. Anthony, 180 Ga. App. 431, 349 S.E.2d 284 (1986).

Payment to court required.

- O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(a) required the defendants, a tenant and the tenant's parent company, to pay to the court all rent and utility payments payable to the landlord under terms of the lease allegedly owed prior to the issuance of the dispossessory warrant because more than two weeks had passed since the date of service, and the court had not decided yet the right of possession issue. McDonald Ga. Commerce Ctr. 400, LLC v. F & C Logistics, Inc., F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Ga. Jan. 2, 2013).

Final judgment.

- Issuance of a writ of possession in a dispossessory action, based on a tenant's failure to comply with the terms of an interim order requiring the payment of rent into the registry of the court, constitutes a final judgment in the case when no claim for damages remains to be tried. Diplomat Restaurant, Inc. v. Anthony, 180 Ga. App. 431, 349 S.E.2d 284 (1986).

Appellate procedure.

- Amount of rents in a dispossessory proceeding do not control the appellate procedure. Vlahos v. DeLong, 132 Ga. App. 722, 209 S.E.2d 12 (1974).

Appellate court assumed evidence supported mortgagee's entitlement to deposited funds.

- Mortgagee was entitled to funds deposited into a state court's registry pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-7-54(c) in a dispossessory proceeding because the mortgagors appealed the state court's ruling granting the mortgagee a writ of possession and failed to provide a transcript of the bench trial, requiring the appellate court to assume that the evidence presented supported the state court's decision. Mackey v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg., 294 Ga. App. 495, 669 S.E.2d 397 (2008).

Cited in Sanks v. Georgia, 401 U.S. 144, 91 S. Ct. 593, 27 L. Ed. 2d 741 (1971); Brown v. Hemperley, 125 Ga. App. 828, 189 S.E.2d 131 (1972); Browning v. F.E. Fortenberry & Sons, 131 Ga. App. 498, 206 S.E.2d 101 (1974); Lopez v. Dlearo, 232 Ga. 339, 206 S.E.2d 454 (1974); First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Shepherd, 131 Ga. App. 692, 206 S.E.2d 571 (1974); Mountain Hardwoods & Pine, Inc. v. Coosa River Sawmill Co., 233 Ga. 414, 211 S.E.2d 712 (1975); Seagraves v. Mount Zion Village, Inc., 134 Ga. App. 719, 215 S.E.2d 688 (1975); Minit Chek Food Stores, Inc. v. Plaza Capital, Inc., 135 Ga. App. 110, 217 S.E.2d 415 (1975); Golden Key Restaurant & Lounge, Inc. v. Key Mgt. Corp., 137 Ga. App. 251, 223 S.E.2d 284 (1976); Smith v. Hudgens, 140 Ga. App. 562, 231 S.E.2d 530 (1976); Powers v. Simmerson, 142 Ga. App. 335, 235 S.E.2d 769 (1977); Filsoof v. Chatham, 144 Ga. App. 464, 241 S.E.2d 582 (1978); Lamb v. Housing Auth., 146 Ga. App. 786, 247 S.E.2d 597 (1978); Howington v. W.H. Ferguson & Sons, 147 Ga. App. 636, 249 S.E.2d 687 (1978); Mathews v. Fidelcor Mtg. Corp., 148 Ga. App. 292, 251 S.E.2d 68 (1978); Yeomans v. American Nat'l Ins. Co., 150 Ga. App. 334, 258 S.E.2d 1 (1979); Johnson v. Gwinnett County Bank, 156 Ga. App. 597, 275 S.E.2d 157 (1980); Peter E. Blum & Co. v. First Bank Bldg. Corp., 156 Ga. App. 680, 275 S.E.2d 751 (1980); Community Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. Cohen, 158 Ga. App. 456, 280 S.E.2d 839 (1981); Officenters Int'l Corp. v. Interstate N. Assocs., 166 Ga. App. 93, 303 S.E.2d 292 (1983); Cheeves v. Horne, 167 Ga. App. 786, 307 S.E.2d 687 (1983); Hall v. VNB Mtg. Corp., 170 Ga. App. 867, 318 S.E.2d 674 (1984); Carter v. Landel/Arundel, Inc., 172 Ga. App. 115, 322 S.E.2d 108 (1984); Baker v. G.T., Ltd., 194 Ga. App. 450, 391 S.E.2d 1 (1990); Kelley v. Daugherty, 201 Ga. App. 291, 410 S.E.2d 759 (1991); T.J. Brooklyne, Inc. v. Sullivan 75, L.P., 239 Ga. App. 588, 521 S.E.2d 644 (1999).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 49 Am. Jur. 2d, Landlord and Tenant, § 956.

C.J.S.

- 52A C.J.S., Landlord and Tenant, § 1361 et seq.

ALR.

- Liability for rent accruing after landlord's institution of action or proceedings against tenant to recover possession, 93 A.L.R. 1474.