O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 46-3-155 (2019)

Construction of article

✓ 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

This article, being for the welfare of the state and its inhabitants, shall be liberally construed to effect the purposes hereof.

History

(Ga. L. 1975, p. 107, § 28.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Municipal Elec. Auth. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 241 Ga. App. 237, 525 S.E.2d 399 (1999).

ARTICLE 4 ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATIONS AND FOREIGN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES JUDICIAL DECISIONS Construction of article to promote competition. - The supreme court will construe the economic aspects of the Georgia Electric Membership Corporation Act, O.C.G.A. § 46-3-170 et seq., in a manner that will broaden competition. Washington Elec. Membership Corp. v. Avant, 256 Ga. 340, 348 S.E.2d 647 (1986). Members disqualified from serving as jurors in prosecution involving corporation. -

Members of an electric membership corporation were disqualified from serving as jurors in a prosecution for criminal damage to property owned by the corporation, even though the corporation was not listed as the actual prosecutor. Lowman v. State, 197 Ga. App. 556, 398 S.E.2d 832 (1990). Cited in Georgia Power Co. v. Altamaha Elec. Membership Corp., 221 Ga. 521, 145 S.E.2d 691 (1965).

T.46, C.3, A.4, P.1

Part 1 General Provisions

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1999–1999 · leading case: Mun. Elec. Auth. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 525 S.E.2d 399 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mun. Elec. Auth. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 525 S.E.2d 399 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “MEAG’s enabling statute does not specifically authorize it to offer telecommunications services to the public for hire, so we must look to see if that authority is necessarily implied from the express grant of other powers.”

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.