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.
This article shall apply to tort actions as well as actions on contracts.
History
Orig. Code 1863, § 2993; Code 1868, § 3006; Code 1873, § 3061; Code 1882, § 3061; Civil Code 1895, § 3901; Civil Code 1910, § 4498; Code 1933, § 3-1005.
Annotations
Law reviews. For article, “A Comprehensive Analysis of Georgia RICO,” see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 537 (1993).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Former Code 1933, § 3-801 (see now O.C.G.A. § 9-3-98) was made applicable to tort actions by former Code 1933, § 3-1005 (see now O.C.G.A. § 93-98). City of Atlanta v. Barrett, 102 Ga. App. 469, 116 S.E.2d 654, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 654 (1960); Lowe v. Pue, 150 Ga.
App. 234, 257 S.E.2d 209, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2129 (1979). New promise will not constitute a new period from which limitations of a tort action will run. Goodwyn v. Goodwyn, 16 Ga. 114, 1854 Ga. LEXIS 177 (1854).
RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 54 C.J.S., Limitation of Actions, §§ 114 et seq., 253 et seq. ALR. Appointment of guardian for incompetent or for infant as affecting running of
statute of limitations against ward, 86 A.L.R.2d 965. Attorney’s mistake or neglect as excuse for failing to file timely notice of tort claim against state or local governmental unit, 55 A.L.R.3d 930.
Notes of Decisions
Dekalb Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Hawkins, 655 S.E.2d 823 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 16× “See OCGA §§ 9-3-33 (two-year statute of limitation for personal injury claims); 9-3-90 (a) (tolling the statute of limitation while the plaintiff is a minor); see also OCGA § 9-3-98 (OCGA § 9-3-90 applies to both tort and contract actions).”
Morris v. Morris, 756 S.E.2d 616 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Apparently realizing that “creditor” as used in the foregoing Code section does not include individuals with tort claims, the General Assembly enacted OCGA § 9-3-98 to make clear that “ [t] his article shall apply to tort actions as well as actions on contracts.”
Sarah Morris v. Martha L. Morris, No. A14A0017 (Ga. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2014).
· cites it 2× “Apparently realizing that “creditor” as used in the foregoing Code section does not include individuals with tort claims, the General Assembly enacted OCGA § 9-3-98 to make clear that “[t]his article shall apply to tort actions as well as actions on contracts.”
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.