O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-10-34 (2019)

Action against third-party defendant

✓ 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) As used in this Code section, the term: (1) “Defending party” means a party to a civil action who is: (A) A defendant who contends that a person or entity not a party to the action is or may be liable to the defendant for all or part of a plaintiff’s claim against the defendant; (B) A plaintiff who contends that a person or entity not a party to the action is or may be liable to the plaintiff for all or part of another party’s claim against the plaintiff; or (C) A third-party defendant who contends that a person or entity not a party to the action is or may be liable to the third-party defendant for all or part of a claim made in the action against the third-party defendant. (2) “Third-party defendant” means any person or entity whom a defending party contends may be liable to the defending party for all or part of the claim made against the defending party in the action. (b) The claim of a defending party against a third-party defendant may be tried in the county where the action in which the claim for which the third-party defendant may be wholly or partially liable to the defending party is pending; and such claim may be tried in such county even though the third-party defendant is not a resident of such county. (c) The venue established under this Code section against a thirdparty defendant is dependent upon the venue over the defending party who brought the third-party defendant into the action, and if venue is lost over said defending party, whether through dismissal or otherwise, venue shall likewise be lost as to the third-party defendant.

History

Code 1981, § 9-10-34, enacted by Ga. L. 1984, p. 1149, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 149, § 9.

Annotations

Cross references. Constitutional authority for third-party venue provisions, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. II, Para. VII. Third-party practice generally, § 9-1114.

Law reviews. For article, “Defending the Lawsuit: A First-Round Checklist,” see 22 Ga. St. B.J. 24 (1985). For note, “Venue in Multidefendant Civil Practice in Georgia,” see 6 Ga. State U.L. Rev. 427 (1990).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS O.C.G.A. § 9-10-34 applied where the collision which underlay plaintiff’s complaint and the third-party complaint occurred prior to the effective date of the

section but the lawsuit was filed after the effective date. Davis v. Betsill, 178 Ga. App. 730, 344 S.E.2d 525, 1986 Ga. App. LEXIS 1723 (1986).

T.9, C.10, A.2, P.2

PART 2 CHANGE OF VENUE Cross references. Change of venue generally, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. II, Para. VIII.

Transfer and change of venue, Uniform Rules for the Probate Courts, Rule 5.8.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1986–2014 · leading case: Bostick v. CMM Props., Inc., 755 S.E.2d 895 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bostick v. CMM Props., Inc., 755 S.E.2d 895 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 9-10-34 (c) states that venue for a third-party defendant “is dependent upon the venue over the defending party who brought the third-party defendant into the action, and if venue is lost over said defending party, whether through dismissal or otherwise, venue shall…”

Davis v. Betsill, 344 S.E.2d 525 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 10× “In response to the motion to dismiss, appellant relied upon OCGA § 9-10-34 (b) which provides as follows: “The claim of a defending party against a third-party defendant may be tried in the county where the action in which the claim for which the third-party defendant may be…”

White Repair & Contracting Co. v. Oviedo, 373 S.E.2d 784 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 9-10-34 (c). It was, however, error to dismiss appellant’s complaint as against them.”

Airgrowers, Inc. v. Tomlinson, 496 S.E.2d 528 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 9-10-34 (b) is also inapposite since the main claim was no longer pending when Lott attempted to amend his cross-claim and add the claim for contribution and indemnity.”

James Bennett Bostick v. Cmm Props., Inc. (Ga. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 9-10-34 (b) states that venue for a third-party defendant “is dependent upon the venue over the defending party who brought the third-party defendant into the action, and if venue is lost over said defending party, whether through dismissal or otherwise, venue shall…”

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.