O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 7-1-814 (2019)

Changing terms of account

✓ 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

The provisions of Code Section 7-1-813 as to rights of survivorship are determined by the form of the account at the death of a party. Once established, the terms of a multiple-party account can be changed only: (1) By closing the account and reopening it under different terms; or (2) By presentation to the financial institution of a modification agreement in a form satisfactory to the financial institution and signed by all parties with a present right of withdrawal.

History

Code 1933, § 41A-3805, enacted by Ga. L. 1976, p. 1388, § 8.

Annotations

Law reviews. For article surveying Georgia cases in

the area of wills, trusts, and administration of estates from June 1977 through May 1978, see 30 Mercer L. Rev. 259 (1978).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Duty of financial institution to change customer’s account. - Any financial institution which receives money from its customer in exchange for certificate(s) of deposit has a duty to issue and/or change the certificate in a manner that complies with the wishes of the customer, so long as the wishes of the customer are not contrary to any applicable law, and the financial institution may be liable to the customer or a third-party beneficiary for

mishandling the transaction, including improperly advising the customer how the certificate should be established or changed to comply with the wishes of the customer. Tucker Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Rawlins, 209 Ga. App. 649, 434 S.E.2d 94, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 978 (1993). Financial institution’s duty to establish or change a customer’s account in a manner that is consistent with the customer’s wishes and the applicable law does not derive solely from O.C.G.A § 7-1-814.

Tucker Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Rawlins, 209 Ga. App. 649, 434 S.E.2d 94, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 978 (1993). One party to account cannot unilaterally divest another party of right to draw on the account. - Once account of a wife is established as multiple-party account, her husband acquires a right to draw on it and she cannot unilaterally divest him of that right by instructing a credit union to delete his name from the account. Grady v. DeKalb County Teachers Fed. Credit Union, 152 Ga. App. 86, 262 S.E.2d 250, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2818 (1979). Compliance with statute required. - Terms of a multiple-party account, including the designation of those parties who have the right of withdrawal, can be changed only by compliance with the requirements of O.C.G.A § 7-1-814. Rawlins v. Campbell, 199 Ga. App. 472, 405 S.E.2d 111, 1991 Ga. App. LEXIS 529 (1991); Ralston v. Etowah Bank, 207 Ga. App. 775, 429 S.E.2d 102, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 349 (1993), cert. denied, No.

S93C0978, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 945 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993), cert. denied, No. S93C1002, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 944 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993). Removal of joint tenants. - Once payee produced her sister’s and husband’s death certificates and had them removed as joint tenants on the CD accounts, the accounts ceased to be multiple-party accounts subject to the strictures of O.C.G.A § 7-1-814. Lowe v. Barnett Bank, 209 Ga. App. 112, 433 S.E.2d 294, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 804 (1993), cert. denied, No. S93C1492, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 914 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993). Punitive damages improperly imposed. - Bank’s action in violation of O.C.G.A § 7-1-814 did not evidence the necessary willful misconduct necessary for an award of punitive damages pursuant to O.C.G.A § 51-12-5.1(b). Ralston v. Etowah Bank, 207 Ga. App. 775, 429 S.E.2d 102, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 349 (1993), cert. denied, No. S93C0978, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 945 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993), cert. denied, No. S93C1002, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 944 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Ralston v. Etowah Bank, 429 S.E.2d 102 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ralston v. Etowah Bank, 429 S.E.2d 102 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 14× “See OCGA § 7-1-814. Ms. Carson died on March 7, 1988, and on March 10, 1988, at Ralston’s request, the Bank transferred $50,000 from the joint account into an account established at the Bank under Ralston’s control.”

Rawlins v. Campbell, 405 S.E.2d 111 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 14× “) OCGA § 7-1-814. It is undisputed that the multiple-party account that is here at issue was never closed and reopened under different terms and that appellee never signed a modification agreement.”

Jordan v. Stephens, 470 S.E.2d 733 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 8× “Although plaintiffs enumerate the trial court's charge on beneficial ownership as error, their actual argument is based upon the trial court's failure to charge OCGA § 7-1-814. The trial court charged that clear and convincing evidence of a joint tenants' intentions was to be…”

Tucker Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Rawlins, 434 S.E.2d 94 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 10× “This court held that plaintiff was not added to the CD as a joint tenant in compliance with OCGA § 7-1-814, and therefore could not recover against Campbell.”

Parker v. Peavey, 403 S.E.2d 213 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “This right of survivorship vests at the death of a party to a joint account, and the terms may be changed only by closing the account and reopening it under another name, OCGA § 7-1-814 (1), or by “presentation to the financial institution of a modification agreement in a form…”

First Union Nat'l Bank v. Davies-Elliott, Inc., 452 S.E.2d 132 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 7-1-814; Bank South v. Harrell, 181 Ga.”

Bank South, N.A. v. Harrell, 351 S.E.2d 263 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 7-1-814. Overlooked, however, was the plain wording of OCGA § 7-1-810 (5): “ ‘Multiple party account’ means any of the following types of account: (A) A joint account; .”

Parker v. Kennon, 530 S.E.2d 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Like OCGA § 7-1-811, OCGA § 7-1-814, giving each joint tenant the right to close a joint account and open a new account on different terms, is 1 *631 addressed only to the authority of joint tenants with regard to the joint account.”

Est. of Ella Mae Haire v. Shelby J. Webster, 570 S.W.3d 683 (Tenn. 2019). “) (requiring all parties with a right of withdrawal to give consent before a financial institution can modify a multiple-party account); Ga. Code Ann. § 7-1-814 (West, Westlaw Act 1 of the 2019 legislative session) (requiring consent from all parties before the terms of a…”

Stevens v. Tri Counties Bank, 177 Cal. App. 4th 236 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 7× “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…”

Howard v. Leonard, 765 S.E.2d 466 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 7-1-814 (terms of multiple-party account can be changed by presenting a proper modification agreement to the financial institution signed by “all parties with a present right of withdrawal”).”

Lowe v. Barnett Bank, 433 S.E.2d 294 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 8× “Moore’s estate, rather than surviving joint tenants, are entitled to the proceeds, because these tenants obtained their rights in violation of OCGA § 7-1-814. Both Lowe and the bank filed motions for summary judgment which the trial court denied.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

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.