O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 50-15-1 (2019)

Definitions

✓ 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

As used in this chapter, the term: (1) ‘‘Political subdivision’’ means the state or any local subdivision of the state or public instrumentality or public corporate body created by or under authority of state law, including, but not limited to, municipalities, counties, school districts, special taxing districts, conservation districts, authorities, and any other state or local public instrumentality or corporation which has the right to bring and defend actions or to issue its bonds or other obligations as evidence of indebtedness under any provision of law and also means any corporate or other entity which leases a public improvement to such political subdivision; and the term also means the governing body of such political subdivision and its members and officers in their official capacity. (2) ‘‘Public lawsuit’’ means any action whereby the validity, reasonability, soundness, location, wisdom, feasibility, extent, or character of construction, improvement, financing, or leasing of any public improvement, project, or facility by any political subdivision, as owner or as lessee, is questioned directly or indirectly, including, but not limited to, actions for declaratory judgments or injunctions or interventions to declare invalid or to enjoin or to prevent such construction, improvement, financing, or leasing as lessor or as lessee and means any action to prevent or declare invalid or enjoin the creation, organization, or formation of any such political subdivision. This definition as used in this chapter shall not be construed to broaden any right of action as is validly limited by applicable law.

History

Ga. L. 1969, p. 815, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in United States v. Hosp. Auth. of Charlton County (In re Hosp. Auth. of

Charlton County), 56 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (LRP) 220 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. July 3, 2012).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. - 81A C.J.S., States, § 53.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1999–2024 · leading case: Haney v. Dev. Auth. of Bremen, 519 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Haney v. Dev. Auth. of Bremen, 519 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1999). · cites it 8× “[3] OCGA § 50-15-1 defines a "political subdivision" as any state or local body with the right to sue or issue bonds.”

Berry v. City of East Point, 627 S.E.2d 391 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “A06A02S3 Because the trial court properly required Intervenors to post a surety bond, and they did not, we dismiss the appeal in Case No.”

Mattox v. Franklin Cnty., 728 S.E.2d 813 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 50-15-2 provides in relevant part: At any time prior to the final determination of a public lawsuit in the trial court or on appeal, any political subdivision which is a party to the action may petition for an order of the court that the opposing party or parties or…”

Hay v. Newton Cnty., 538 S.E.2d 181 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “The Joint Authority and Counties argue that this court has already determined that the imposition of the supersedeas bond was appropriate in the order we issued on December 30, 1999, and therefore this appeal should be dismissed without consideration of the merits.”

State of Georgia v. Edward Clay (Ga. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 7× “9 Here, the plaintiffs brought lawsuits challenging the Rivian Project, and the opposing parties are clearly political subdivisions within the meaning of the Act.”

Jerry Mattox v. Franklin Cnty. (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 6× “3 OCGA § 50-15-1 (2) defines a “public lawsuit” as any action whereby the validity, reasonability, soundness, location, wisdom, feasibility, extent, or character of construction, improvement, financing, or leasing of any public improvement, project, or facility by any political…”

Edward Clay v. State of Georgia (Ga. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “”) (citation and punctuation omitted); see also OCGA § 50-15-1 (2). And, although the plaintiffs contend that the State merely owns the land but is not using it for any “governmental purpose,” we are not persuaded.”

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.