O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 50-27-75 (2019)

Delivery of order refusing application or imposing sanction

✓ 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

(a) The corporation shall deliver to the applicant or licensee a written copy of the order refusing an application or renewal application, revoking a master license, or imposing any other sanction provided in this article issued after any required hearing provided by Code Section (b) Delivery of the corporation’s order may be given by: (1) Personal service upon an individual applicant or licensee; (2) Personal service upon any officer, director, partner, trustee, or receiver, as the case may be; (3) Personal service upon the person in charge of the business premises, temporarily or otherwise, of the applicant or licensee; (4) Sending such notice by United States certified mail or statutory overnight delivery addressed to the business premises of the applicant or licensee; or (5) Posting notice upon the outside door of the business premises of the applicant or licensee. (c) Notice shall be deemed complete upon the performance of any action authorized in this Code section.

History

Code 1981, § 48-17-6, enacted by Ga. L. 1992, p. 1521, § 3; Ga. L. 1998, p. 563, § 4; Ga. L. 2000, p. 1589, § 3; Code 1981, § 50-27-75, as redesignated by Ga. L. 2013, p. 37, § 1-1/HB 487.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 2000, p. 1589, § 16, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that this Act shall apply with respect to notices delivered on or after July 1, 2000. Ga. L. 2013, p. 37, § 3-1/HB 487, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that: ‘‘(b) If any section of this Act is determined to be unconstitutional by a final decision of an appellate court of competent jurisdiction or by the trial court of competent jurisdiction if no appeal is made, with the exception of

subsection (g) of Code Section 50-27-78 and Section 2-1 of this Act, this Act shall stand repealed by operation of law. ‘‘(c) This Act is not intended to and shall not be construed to affect the legality of the repair, transport, possession, or use of otherwise prohibited gambling devices on maritime vessels within the jurisdiction of the State of Georgia. To the extent that such repair, transport, possession, or use was lawful prior to the enactment of this Act, it shall not be made illegal by this Act; and to the extent that such repair, transport, possession, or use was prohibited prior to the enactment of this Act, it shall remain prohibited.’’ As of May 2021, no such decision has been issued.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2023–2023 · leading case: Lucky Fortune, LLC v. Georgia Lottery Corp. (Ga. Ct. App. 2023).
Lucky Fortune, LLC v. Georgia Lottery Corp. (Ga. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “5 (1) (a) (3); see also OCGA §§ 50-27-75 (a), 50-27- 102 (d) (5) (“The decision of the hearing officer may be appealed to the chief executive officer or his or her designee.”
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.