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

O.C.G.A. § 49-5-1 (2019)

Short title

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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 shall be known and may be cited as the “Children and Youth Act.”

History

Ga. L. 1963, p. 81, § 1; Ga. L. 2013, p. 141, § 49/HB 79. Administrative rules and regulations. Recovery and administration of child

support, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Department of Human Services, Office of Child Support Recovery, § 290-7-1-.01 et seq.

Annotations

The 2013 amendment, effective April 24, 2013, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, substituted "This article shall be known and may be cited as" for "The short title of this article shall be" at the beginning of this Code section.

Cross references. - Probation officers, Uniform Rules for the Juvenile Courts of Georgia, Rule 2.4.

Administrative Rules and Regulations. - Recovery and administration of child support, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Department of Human Resources, Office of Child Support Recovery, Chapter 290-7-1.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Custody and control exclusively in department. - Ga. L. 1963, p. 81 et seq. and Ga. L. 1971, p. 709 et seq. (see O.C.G.A. Ch. 11, T. 15 and Ch. 5, T. 49) when construed in pari materia, evidence a legislative intent that, once the juvenile court judge in the exercise of judicial discretion commits a juvenile to the Division for Children and Youth (now Department of Children and Youth Services) custody and control of the juvenile is thereby and thereafter exclusively in the division (now department). In re R.D., 141 Ga. App. 843, 234 S.E.2d 680 (1977); In re R.L.M., 171 Ga. App. 940, 321 S.E.2d 435 (1984).

Cited in Brown v. Holloway, 112 Ga. App. 539, 145 S.E.2d 600 (1965); Carrindine v. Ricketts, 236 Ga. 283, 223 S.E.2d 627 (1976); In re A.S., 140 Ga. App. 865, 232 S.E.2d 145 (1977); Ellis v. State, 289 Ga. App. 452, 657 S.E.2d 562 (2008).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1986–2006 · leading case: In Re Tidwell, 632 S.E.2d 690 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Tidwell, 632 S.E.2d 690 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 49-5-1 et seq. and OCGA § 15-11-1 et seq.”
McCall Ex Rel. Odom v. Dep't of Human Resources, 176 F. Supp. 2d 1355 (M.D. Ga. 2001). · cites it 2× “In Taylor, the Eleventh Circuit examined this statutory scheme, which is titled the Children and Youth Act, see O.C.G.A. §§ 49-5-1 to -22 (1998 & Supp. 2001), and concluded that it “mandates that officials follow guidelines and take affirmative actions to ensure the well being…”
Kathy Jo Taylor, a Minor, by & Through David S. Walker, Jr., Attorney at Law, as Guardian Ad Litem v. James G. Ledbetter, ph.d., 791 F.2d 881 (11th Cir. 1986). “Plaintiff contends that the Georgia statutory foster care scheme, contained in the Children and Youth Act, O.C.G.A. §§ 49-5-1 to -5-21, creates legitimate claims of entitlement to certain benefits for the plaintiff, and that defendants violated plaintiff’s due process rights by…”
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.