O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-12-111 (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 article, the term: (1) ‘‘Foreign country’’ means a government other than: (A) The United States; (B) Any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; or (C) Any other government with regard to which the decision in this state as to whether to recognize a judgment of such government’s court is initially subject to determination under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution. (2) ‘‘Foreign-country judgment’’ means any judgment of a court of a foreign country.

History

(Ga. L. 1975, p. 479, § 1; Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 2-1/SB 65.)

Annotations

Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 1-1/SB 65, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: ‘‘(a) This Act shall be known and may be cited as the ‘Debtor Creditor Uniform Law Modernization Act of 2015.’ ‘‘(b) To promote consistency among the states, it is the intent of the General Assembly to modernize certain existing uniform laws promulgated by the Uniform Law Commission affecting debtor and creditor rights, responsibilities, and relationships and other federally recognized laws affecting such rights, responsibilities, and relationships.’’ Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 7-1/SB 65, not codified by the General Assembly, provides in part: ‘‘Part 2 of this Act shall apply to all actions filed on or after July 1, 2015, in which the recognition of a foreign country judgment is raised.’’

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Meaning of ‘‘foreign court.’’ - Although court decisions refer to ‘‘foreign courts’’ in referring to sister states, the legislature in this section truly intended ‘‘foreign’’ to mean ‘‘nondomestic’’ courts of the United States. Collins v. Peacock, 147 Ga. App. 424, 249 S.E.2d 142 (1978). This article has no application to a

foreign judgment for support in matrimonial or family matters. Jacoby v. Jacoby, 150 Ga. App. 725, 258 S.E.2d 534 (1979); Knothe v. Rose, 195 Ga. App. 7, 392 S.E.2d 570 (1990). Cited in Kronitz v. Fifth Ave. Dance Studio, Inc., 242 Ga. 398, 249 S.E.2d 80 (1978).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. - Money-Judgments (U.L.A.) § 1.

Uniform Foreign Recognition Act

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1987–1999 · leading case: Dep't of Human Resources v. Fenner, 510 S.E.2d 534 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dep't of Human Resources v. Fenner, 510 S.E.2d 534 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “” OCGA § 9-12-111 (1). Furthermore, Connecticut is not a “foreign state” as defined in OCGA § 9-12-111 (2) (B).”

Brown v. Rock, 362 S.E.2d 480 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 9-12-111; Collins v. Peacock, 147 Ga.”

Knothe v. Rose, 392 S.E.2d 570 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 9-12-111 (1). Nonetheless, defendant contends that this statute provides persuasive grounds to refuse recognition of this West German judgment particularly insofar as it conditions enforcement of the foreign judgment upon a showing that the West German courts would…”

Thompson v. Potomac River Front Ltd. P'ship, 458 S.E.2d 390 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “In addition, Thompson’s reliance upon the Georgia Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act is misplaced because that statute applies only to judgments obtained in jurisdictions outside the United States and its insular possessions.”

Yoo v. Parker, 526 S.E.2d 85 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “101, 102 ( 332 SE2d 394 ) (1985); see also OCGA § 9-12-115 (a) (2) (setting forth essentially the same rule as that *48 applied in Van Buskirk , but inapplicable to judgments rendered in sister states as provided in OCGA § 9-12-111). See E. Howard St. Clair & Assoc.”

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.