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.
Code Sections 7-1-812 through 7-1-814, concerning beneficial ownership as between parties or as between parties and P.O.D. payees or beneficiaries of multiple-party accounts, are relevant only to controversies between those persons and their creditors and other successors and have no bearing on the power of withdrawal of these persons as determined by the terms of account contracts. Code Sections 7-1-816 through 7-1-821 govern the liability of financial institutions which make payments pursuant thereto and their setoff rights.
History
Code 1933, § 41A-3802, enacted by Ga. L. 1976, p. 1388, § 8.
Annotations
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Right of one party to a joint bank account to follow money withdrawn by the other, 77 A.L.R. 799.
Joint bank account as subject to attachment, garnishment, or execution by creditor of one joint depositor, 86 A.L.R.5th 527.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1989–2014 · leading case:
Parker v. Kennon, 530 S.E.2d 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000).
Parker v. Kennon, 530 S.E.2d 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 6× “OCGA § 7-1-811, relied upon by Parker and Hunter, provides that, Code Sections 7-1-812 through 7-1-814, concerning beneficial ownership as between parties or as between parties and P.”
Lamb v. Thalimer Enter., Inc., 386 S.E.2d 912 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “” OCGA § 7-1-811. In the case at bar, the trial court found that the proceeds from the sale of the house appellant and Lamb jointly owned comprised the funds deposited in the joint account, and the parties on appeal do not contest that finding.”
Tucker Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Rawlins, 434 S.E.2d 94 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “In support of this argument, Tucker Federal relies upon the language of OCGA § 7-1-811: “Code Sections 7-1-812 through 7-1-814, concerning beneficial ownership as between parties or as between parties and P.”
Howard v. Leonard, 765 S.E.2d 466 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Finally, the law of joint accounts found in OCGA §§ 7-1-812 through 7-1-814 “concerning beneficial ownership as between parties” has “no bearing on the power of withdrawal of these persons as determined by the terms of account contracts.”
Echols v. Trust Co. Bank, 401 S.E.2d 565 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “542, 546 ( 136 SE 444 ) and OCGA § 7-1-811. The controversy between plaintiff and defendant Williamson, which is not at issue in this appeal, is governed by OCGA § 7-1-813 which provides in part that: “Sums remaining on deposit at the death of a party to a joint account belong…”
Stevens v. Tri Counties Bank, 177 Cal. App. 4th 236 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
“It would be absurd, however, to hold as Tucker Federal urges that these statutes, in particular OCGA § 7-1-814 which establishes the procedure for making changes to multiple-party accounts, cannot be considered in determining whether there has been a breach of the duty owed by…”
Marketta Howard v. Ronald Leonard (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 4× “And there is no evidence in the record, 4 OCGA § 7-1-813 is applicable to a claim by the estate of a deceased party, e.g., Royce’s estate, to a joint account against a co-party to the account because OCGA § 7-1-812 through 7-1-814, “concerning beneficial ownership as between…”
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.