O.C.G.A.
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.
As used in this article, the term “contractor” means any person engaged in the business of constructing, altering, repairing, dismantling, or demolishing buildings, roads, bridges, viaducts, sewers, water and gas mains, streets, disposal plants, water filters, tanks and towers, airports, dams, water wells, pipelines, and every other type of structure, project, development, or improvement coming within the definition of real property or personal property including, but not limited to, constructing, altering, or repairing of property to be held either for sale or rental, and all subcontractors so engaged.
History
Ga. L. 1961, p. 480, § 1; Code 1933,
§ 91A-6101, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS When registration required. - If the corporation in question were a foreign supplier of equipment to be installed by others, the corporation would not have to register; but, if the corporation also installed the equipment in any wise, it would be liable to and subject to the nonresident contractor’s provisions. American Hosp. Supply Corp. v. Starline Mfg. Corp., 171 Ga. App. 790, 320 S.E.2d 857, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 2339 (1984).
Construction of a telecommunications line fits within the definition of contracting activities under O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30. Clover Cable of Ohio, Inc. v. Heywood, 260 Ga. 341, 392 S.E.2d 855, 1990 Ga. LEXIS 266 (1990). Subcontractor’s exempt status from the sales and use tax provisions of O.C.G.A. § 48-8-63 did not confer upon the subcontractor an automatic exemption from compliance with O.C.G.A.
SPECIFIC, BUSINESS, & OCCUPATION TAXES
T. 48, C. 13, A. 2. Adams v. PPT, Inc., 191 Ga. App. 729, 382 S.E.2d 732, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 781 (1989). Provider of services not exempted. - In defining the term “contractor”, O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30 does not exempt a provider of services. Adams v. PPT, Inc., 191 Ga. App. 729, 382 S.E.2d 732, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 781 (1989). Substantial compliance by contractor. - When a nonresident contractor did not comply with O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30 et seq. prior to beginning the contractor’s work but, as part of the contractor’s contract with Department of Transportation (DOT), signed performance and payment bonds for 100 percent of the amount of the contract that expressly covered the payment of all state and local taxes and, prior to completion of the project, completed all steps to comply with the article, the contractor substantially complied with the article, thus, the trial court did not err in denying the DOT’s motion to dismiss the contractor’s action for additional compensation. DOT v. Moseman Constr. Co., 260 Ga. 369, 393 S.E.2d 258, 1990 Ga. LEXIS 284 (1990). Burden of proving defense of noncompliance. - Noncompliance with
the Nonresident Contractors Act, O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30 et seq., is an affirmative defense asserted by the owner and, although it need not be pled, the owner has the burden of proving the elements of the defense the owner asserts. Underground Festival, Inc. v. McAfee Eng’r Co., 214 Ga. App. 243, 447 S.E.2d 683, 1994 Ga. App. LEXIS 849 (1994), cert. denied, No. S94C1816, 1994 Ga. LEXIS 1181 (Ga. Dec. 2, 1994). Dismissal of action not required. - Failure of business to comply with Georgia Nonresident Contractors Act, O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30 et seq., did not require dismissal of action against a corporation; the fraud claims at issue arose out of a proposed merger agreement and did not depend upon a contract to perform work in Georgia or upon the recovery of payment for performance under the contract. Infrasource, Inc. v. Hahn Yalena Corp., 272 Ga. App. 703, 613 S.E.2d 144, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 287 (2005), cert. denied, No. S05C1304, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 605 (Ga. Sept. 19, 2005).
RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 56 C.J.S., Mechanics’ Liens, §§ 82, 87 et seq.
Notes of Decisions
George C. Carroll Constr. Co. v. Langford Constr. Co., 355 S.E.2d 756 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 23× “Under OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq. a nonresident contractor as defined (OCGA § 48-13-30), who desires to engage in the contracting business in Georgia, must register with the Revenue Commissioner when the total contract price or compensation to be received amounts to more than…”
Infrasource, Inc. v. Hahn Yalena Corp., 613 S.E.2d 144 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “Infrasource also contends that Hahn failed to comply with the provisions of the Georgia Nonresident Contractors Act, OCGA §§ 48-13-30 through 48-13-38, and that its action therefore should be dismissed without prejudice.”
Am. Hosp. Supply Corp. v. Starline Mfg. Corp., 320 S.E.2d 857 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 4× “See OCGA §§ 48-13-30, 48-13-31, 48-13-37. Genuine issues of material fact remain for determination as to whether the plaintiff was required to register, being a foreign supplier of equipment to be installed by others, or whether it also installed same in any wise so as to be…”
Taco Bell Corp. v. Calson Corp., 379 S.E.2d 6 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “The motion alleged inter alia that appellee, a nonresident contractor, failed to prove its compliance with the registration and bonding provisions of the Nonresident Contractors Act, OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq. before entering upon performance of the construction contract, and that,…”
Hardin Constr. Grp., Inc. v. Fuller Enter., Inc., 505 S.E.2d 755 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 4× “Hardin appeals the grant of summary judgment to Fuller and asserts that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss Fuller's application to confirm the award based upon: (1) the expiration of the statute of limitation; (2) insufficient service of process on Hardin; and (3)…”
Rehco Corp. v. California Pizza Kitchen, Inc., 383 S.E.2d 643 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “CPK answered, alleging, inter alia, Rehco’s noncompliance with the Nonresident Contractors Act (the Act), OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq., and moved for summary judgment.”
Hardin Constr. Grp., Inc. v. Fuller Enter., Inc., 462 S.E.2d 130 (Ga. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Hardin answered that Fuller had failed to seek confirmation within the one-year period contemplated by OCGA § 9-9-12 and had failed to comply with the Nonresident Contractors Act, OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq., and served discovery requests related to these defenses.”
Clover Cable of Ohio, Inc. v. Heywood, 392 S.E.2d 855 (Ga. 1990).
· cites it 2× “S90A0013, Burnup cross-appeals the trial court’s failure to dismiss all of Clover’s claims against Burnup, and Burnup argues that portions of an affidavit relied upon by Clover were inadmissible.”
Underground Festival, Inc. v. McAfee Eng'g Co., 447 S.E.2d 683 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “UFI contends the trial court erred in denying its motion for directed verdict because McAfee failed to prove it complied with the Nonresident Contractors Act, OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq. The Act requires nonresident contractors doing business in this state to register with the…”
Dep't of Transp. v. Moseman Constr. Co., 393 S.E.2d 258 (Ga. 1990).
· cites it 2× “The DOT moved to dismiss based on Moseman’s noncompliance with the Georgia Nonresident Contractors Act (NCA), OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq. The NCA provides that nonresident contractors must register with the Revenue Commissioner for all contracts in Georgia exceeding $10,000; pay a…”
ADC Constr. Co. v. Hall, 381 S.E.2d 76 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “One of ADC’s defenses to the lawsuit was that Hall had violated the Nonresident Contractor Act, OCGA § 48-13-30 et seq. ADC’s position was that Hall was a resident of Tennessee, not Georgia, and that since he had failed to register with the commissioner or otherwise comply with…”
Davis Constructors v. Dartco Mfg., Inc., 668 F. Supp. 380 (D. Del. 1987).
· cites it 3× “Counsel for Davis also learned that Davis had not filed with the Revenue Commissioner of the State of Georgia the bond required by Georgia statute O.C.G.A. § 48-13-30 et seq. This statute provides that a nonresident contractor, who wishes to engage in the contracting business in…”
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.