O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-7-6 (2019)

Tenancy at will - Creation when no time period specified

✓ 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

Where no time is specified for the termination of a tenancy, the law construes it to be a tenancy at will.

History

(Orig. Code 1863, § 2271; Code 1868, § 2264; Code 1873, § 2290; Code 1882, § 2290; Civil Code 1895, § 3132; Civil Code 1910, § 3708; Code 1933, § 61-104; Ga. L. 1952, p. 201, § 1.)

Annotations

Law reviews. - For comment on Metzer v. Connally Realty Co., 75 Ga. App. 274, 43

S.E.2d 169 (1947), see 10 Ga. B.J. 229 (1947).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Creation of tenancy at will. - Tenancies at will in Georgia may be created by express contract, by force of statute, when a contract creating the relationship of landlord and tenant is made in parol for a greater time than one year, or by implication, as for example, if there was no original express contract for a definite term. Stepp v. Richman, 75 Ga. App. 169, 42 S.E.2d 773 (1947). Term in dispute. - Statute is not applicable merely because there is a disagreement over the term of the tenancy. Harris v. Cleghorn, 121 Ga. 314, 48 S.E. 959 (1904); Buice v. McCarty-Johnstone Co., 28 Ga. App. 192, 110 S.E. 503 (1922) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-6). Tenant holding over. - Provision in a written lease contract conferring upon lessee privilege of renewal of lease for five years at same rental is a covenant to grant an estate, and not a present demise; consequently, upon expiration of original lease, the execution of a new lease is necessary,

and the lessee holding over after the expiration of the original lease becomes a tenant at will. Walker v. Brooks Simmons Co., 44 Ga. App. 470, 161 S.E. 659 (1931). Right of first refusal to re-lease in expired written leases. - Right of first refusal to re-lease given to a corporation under written leases for nursing home facilities was not a general term or condition of the leases; even assuming there was an extension of the written leases, it terminated, and any lease beyond that time was, at best, an oral agreement for an indefinite period of time, hence unenforceable; because the leases limited the time for the right of first refusal to ‘‘during the lease term’’ and because the corporation was a tenant-at-will after the expiration of the written leases, the corporation could not enforce the right of first refusal contained in the expired leases. Mariner Healthcare, Inc. v. Foster, 280 Ga. App. 406, 634 S.E.2d 162 (2006). Tenancy at will not created. - Although the tenant in a dispossessory action argued

that the tenant was a tenant at will and entitled to 60 days notice of the termination of the tenant’s tenancy under O.C.G.A. § 44-7-7, the tenant admitted that the tenant entered into a 10-year lease and thus was not a tenant at will; in any event, there was no requirement that the lease or the tenancy be terminated before filing a dispossessory action for nonpayment of rent. Siratu v. Diane Inv. Group, 298 Ga. App. 127, 679 S.E.2d 359 (2009). Term dependent on contingency. - When the plaintiff agreed orally with the defendant that the plaintiff could occupy a house of the defendant until certain other property was sold by the plaintiff and the duration of the tenancy by its express terms depended upon the happening of the contingency, such an agreement, not naming any term, cannot properly be considered as a lease for years, but created a tenancy at will.

Heaton v. Fulton Nat’l Bank, 46 Ga. App. 773, 169 S.E. 216 (1933). Oral agreement to rent real property that did not specify a date for termination was a tenancy at will and the trial court’s judgment ordering two tenants to vacate the property after the landlord gave them 60 days’ notice that the landlord was terminating the tenancy was upheld. Gu v. Liu, 262 Ga. App. 443, 585 S.E.2d 740 (2003). Cited in Smith v. Hightower, 80 Ga. App. 293, 55 S.E.2d 872 (1949); Cooper v. Vaughan, 81 Ga. App. 330, 58 S.E.2d 453 (1950); City Council v. Henry, 92 Ga. App. 408, 88 S.E.2d 576 (1955); Roberts v. Graham, 98 Ga. App. 309, 105 S.E.2d 801 (1958); Pitman v. Griffeth, 131 Ga. App. 489, 206 S.E.2d 115 (1974); Thomas v. Clark, 178 Ga. App. 823, 344 S.E.2d 754 (1986); Williams v. State, 261 Ga. App. 511, 583 S.E.2d 172 (2003).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Rule stated. - Parties may agree orally or in writing to any manner of termination the parties desire, which manner shall be binding upon the parties; however, if no time is

specified for the termination of the lease, the law construes the lease to be a tenancy at will. 1967 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 67-59.

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 49 Am. Jur. 2d, Landlord and Tenant, § 69 et seq. C.J.S. - 51C C.J.S., Landlord and Tenant, § 157. ALR. - Deed or lease of real property as affecting rights and remedies available against tenant at will or by sufferance, 151 ALR 369.

Indefiniteness as to term in option for extension or renewal of lease, 172 ALR 421. Waiver or estoppel as to notice requirement for exercising option to renew or extend lease, 32 ALR4th 452. What constitutes tenant’s holding over leased premises, 13 ALR5th 169.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1986–2020 · leading case: Mariner Healthcare, Inc. v. Foster, 634 S.E.2d 162 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).
Mariner Healthcare, Inc. v. Foster, 634 S.E.2d 162 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “7 OCGA § 44-7-6. 8 See Valiant Steel & Equip.”
Williams v. State, 583 S.E.2d 172 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “5 OCGA §§ 44-7-6; 44-7-7. 6 Carruth v. Carruth, 77 Ga.”
Erfani v. Bishop, 553 S.E.2d 326 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff admitted that he returned to the premises on May 1,1996, and forced the door to enter to get the remainder of his property.”
Meadows v. Hagler (In Re Meadows), 428 B.R. 894 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2010). · cites it 2× “The postpetition obligation, he asserts, arises from a tenancy at will that arose following the Debtor’s bankruptcy case based on his continued occupancy of the premises after the filing of his bankruptcy case, his post-petition payment of rent, and his representations to the…”
Thomas v. Clark, 344 S.E.2d 754 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “” Clark contends that he and Thomas entered into an oral agreement for a two-year lease of the property, and that after the expiration of the lease Thomas remained in possession as a tenant at will subject to termination upon notice to vacate after 60 days pursuant to OCGA §§…”
Siratu v. Diane Inv. Grour Ltd., 679 S.E.2d 359 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “5 See OCGA § 44-7-6 (a tenancy at will is established when no time period for the termination of a tenancy is specified).”
Drury v. Sec. State Bank, 759 S.E.2d 635 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Compare OCGA § 44-7-6 (“Where no time is specified for the termination of a tenancy, the law construes it to be a tenancy at will.”
Gentry v. Chateau Props., 511 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 44-7-6. See also Western Union Tel.”
In Re Scott, 209 B.R. 777 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1997). · cites it 2× “” O.C.G.A. § 44-7-6. 4 . The Official Code of Georgia does not define a tenancy at sufferance.”
In re Bowman, 555 B.R. 918 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2016). · cites it 2× “1997) (“[i]n Georgia, tenancies at will are often understood as a month to month arrangement between landlord and tenant”); see also O.C.G.A. § 44-7-6. However, at the time of the filing of the Debtor’s petition, the extent of the Debtor’s leasehold interest in the Property was…”
Transmax Prods., LLC v. Swartzberg (N.D. Ga. 2020). · cites it 2× “” O.C.G.A. § 44-7-6. See also Plank v. Bourdon, 173 Ga.”
Gu v. Liu, 585 S.E.2d 740 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 44-7-6; Gentry v. Chateau Properties, 236 Ga.”
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.