O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-6-63 (2019)

Service of writ and process

✓ 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 “personal service” means service by placing a copy of the writ and process in the quo warranto proceeding in the hands of the defendant. (b) The writ and process in a quo warranto proceeding shall be served on the defendant personally. (c) Service of the writ and process in such proceeding upon a resident of this state who is temporarily residing or sojourning outside this state may be perfected in the same manner as is provided for service of process by publication as set forth in paragraph (1) of subsection (f) of Code Section 9-11-4 or personal service outside the state as set forth in paragraph (2) of subsection (f) of Code Section 9-11-4. When service is perfected upon any such person as provided for in the aforesaid Code section, then the person shall be bound by the final decision of the proceedings as fully as though the person had been personally served within this state.

History

Code 1933, § 64-202.1, enacted by Ga.

L. 1964, p. 766, § 1; Ga. L. 2000, p. 1225, § 2.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Third parties. - In an action seeking quo warranto, because the trial court’s order was not directed at a party not served, and did not require that party to do anything, a third party lacked any

legal right to complain that the party was not served. City of College Park v. Wyatt, 282 Ga. 479, 651 S.E.2d 686, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 728 (2007).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 65 Am. Jur. 2d, Quo Warranto, § 47.

C.J.S. 74 C.J.S., Quo Warranto, § 40.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2007–2007 · leading case: City of Coll. Park v. Wyatt, 651 S.E.2d 686 (Ga. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Coll. Park v. Wyatt, 651 S.E.2d 686 (Ga. 2007). · cites it 2× “The city also asserts Dixon was not personally served with process, see OCGA § 9-6-63, and that this quo warranto proceeding could not proceed without her.”
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.