O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-13-173 (2019)

Effect of judicial sale on title

✓ 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 sale regularly made by virtue of judicial process issuing from a court of competent jurisdiction shall convey the title as effectually as if the sale were made by the person against whom the process was issued.

History

(Orig. Code 1863, § 2575; Code 1868, § 2577; Code 1873, § 2619; Code 1882, § 2619; Civil Code 1895, § 5446; Civil Code 1910, § 6051; Code 1933, § 39-1303.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS This section states cardinal rule that purchaser at judicial sale acquires title and interest of the defendant in execution. Andrews v. Murphy, 12 Ga. 431 (1853); Roberts v. Boylon, 24 Ga. 40 (1858). Rule of this section applies to sale of property by federal revenue officer. Walters v. Taylor, 19 Ga. App. 822, 92 S.E. 352 (1917). Purchaser under void judgment may acquire title by adverse possession. Gitten’s Lessee v. Lowry, 15 Ga. 336 (1854); Rogers v. Smith, 146 Ga. 373, 91 S.E. 414 (1917). Sale regularly made by virtue of proper judicial process issuing from court of competent jurisdiction conveys title as effectually as if the sale were made by the person against whom the process issues; and the purchaser at such sale is ordinarily entitled to immediate possession, which the purchaser may obtain by writ of possession; but this is not the purchaser’s exclusive remedy. Hill v. Kitchens, 39 Ga. App. 789, 148 S.E. 754 (1929); Hunter v. Ranitz, 88 Ga. App. 182, 76 S.E.2d 542 (1953). Judicial sale of property does not divest it of lien for taxes. Harris Orchard Co. v. Tharpe, 177 Ga. 547, 170 S.E. 811 (1933). Purchaser at judicial sale takes property subject to homestead set apart by prior judgment of the ordinary (now probate judge). Cook v. Hendricks, 146 Ga. 63, 90 S.E. 383 (1916). Purchaser at judicial sale is subject to lease. Field v. Howell, 6 Ga. 423 (1849). Purchaser at judicial sale is subject to other claims after garnishee sold

property to bona fide purchaser prior to judgment. McCranie v. Gaskins, 146 Ga. 802, 92 S.E. 533 (1917). Unrecorded rights of vendor, under retention of title contract, will not be protected. Pickard & Hogg v. Garrett, 141 Ga. 831, 82 S.E. 251 (1914). Errors by sheriff in sale of property. - If the sheriff has authority to sell property, a failure in the performance of any part of the sheriff ’s duty, and for which the sheriff would be compelled to indemnify the owner to the extent of the injury received, would not destroy the title of an innocent purchaser. Ryals v. Lindsay, 176 Ga. 7, 167 S.E. 284 (1932). Sale of property when security deed foreclosed as equitable mortgage. - When a security deed was foreclosed as an equitable mortgage, and the equity of redemption forever barred, and the land was sold under order of the court by a commissioner, and the sale was approved by the court, the approval of the sale was a confirmation of all previous steps in the proceeding, and the purchaser at such sale received as full title as was held by the holder of the security deed. Ryals v. Lindsay, 176 Ga. 7, 167 S.E. 284 (1932). Cited in Holt v. Laurens, 193 Ga. 136, 17 S.E.2d 571 (1941); J.R. Watkins Co. v. Farmers Fertilizer Co., 195 Ga. 455, 24 S.E.2d 660 (1943); Townsend v. Tattnall Bank, 76 Ga. App. 500, 46 S.E.2d 607 (1948); McGinley v. Goette, 205 Ga. 225, 52 S.E.2d 848 (1949); Tow v. Forrester, 122 Ga. App. 718, 178 S.E.2d 692 (1970); Gilbert v. Reynolds, 233 Ga. 488, 212 S.E.2d 332 (1975).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 47 Am. Jur. 2d, Judicial Sales, § 146 et seq. C.J.S. - 50A C.J.S., Judicial Sales, §§ 87, 88. ALR. - Effect of destruction of or damage to property after judicial or execution sale on rights and liability of successful bidder, 17 ALR 970; 25 ALR 71. Violation of direction of decree or order

as regards sale of land in parcels or in gross as affecting validity of sale and title of purchaser, 84 ALR 324. Sheriff ’s deed as making a prima facie case for one seeking to recover land thereunder, 108 ALR 667. Right of purchaser at execution or judicial sale to value of personal use and occupation by judgment debtor or his suc-

cessor in interest during period of redemption, 153 ALR 739. Reversal, upon writ of error or appeal, of decree directing judicial sale as affecting title of stranger to litigation who purchased at such sale before appeal or pending appeal without supersedeas, 155 ALR 1252.

Purchase of cotenant’s interest at judicial sale as making purchaser cotenant, 159 ALR 395. Right of purchaser at judicial or execution sale made subject to a purported lien to question validity thereof, 171 ALR 302.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2019–2019 · leading case: Wells Fargo Bank, N..a. v. Richmond (M.D. Ga. 2019).
Wells Fargo Bank, N..a. v. Richmond (M.D. Ga. 2019). · cites it 2× “This Order will be recorded/indexed by the Clerk of Muscogee Superior Court, with the same legal effect as a conveyance per O.C.G.A. § 9-13-173 and an order per O.C.”
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.