- For article discussing government insights-in-credit specifications as well as their relation to county guidelines, pick 6 Ga. St. B. J. 19 (1969). Rev. 281 (1978). To possess blog post, "New Federalization and you can Privatization regarding Public User Defense Law on All of us: Its Impact on Lawsuits and you will Enforcement," see twenty four Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 663 (2008). L. Rev. 454 (1975).
- Standard Planning
- Federal Preemption
Ford System Borrowing Co
- The latest product sales regarding a mobile domestic appear when you look at the arrangements away from Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § 1. Manager v. Brock, 129 Ga. Application. 732 installment loans Florence AL, 200 S.E.2d 912 (1973), overruled toward most other grounds, Tucker v. Chung Studio out of Karate, Inc., 142 Ga. Software. 818, 237 S.E.2d 223 (1977); Smith v. Neighborhood Nat'l Financial, 141 Ga. Software. 19, 232 S.Elizabeth.2d 367 (1977); Porter v. Midland-Guardian Co., 145 Ga. Software. 262, 243 S.Age.2d 595, rev'd with the almost every other grounds, 242 Ga. 1, 247 S.Age.2d 743 (1978).
To own notice discussing transfer fees home based loan presumptions for the site to your Georgia usury laws, look for 9 Ga
- The fresh mere visibility out-of a speed term isn’t violative out-of Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § 1. Environmentally friendly v. Customers & S. Financial, 153 Ga. Application. 342, 265 S.E.2d 286 (1980).
- A great "documentary preparation" fee explicitly identified as instance into the a motor vehicle financing bargain and you may put in the unpaid equilibrium of price as an enthusiastic "most other costs" was not a financing fees whilst try energized to consumer purchasers (both dollars and you can borrowing). Thus, the brand new offer complied that have federal and state law. Ferris v. Chrysler Borrowing Corp., 764 F.2d 1475 (11th Cir.), rehearing declined, 770 F.2d 1084 (11th Cir. 1985).
- Georgia laws, in lieu of South carolina law, ruled a mobile home shopping payment transformation deal joined toward by Sc customers that have a Georgia specialist as the contract contains the option of legislation supply indicating that offer are construed in accordance with the rules of the county in which the latest seller's office are located. Moyer v. Citicorp Homeowners, Inc., 799 F.2d 1445 (11th Cir. 1986).
Cited inside the System Price Co. v. Sawyer, 123 Ga. Application. 207, 180 S.E.2d 282 (1971); Geiger Fin. Co. v. Graham, 123 Ga. Software. 771, 182 S.Elizabeth.2d 521 (1971); Smith v. Singleton, 124 Ga. Software. 394, 184 S.E.2d twenty six (1971); Whittlesey v. , 542 F.2d 245 (fifth Cir. 1976); Jordan v. , 141 Ga. Application. 280, 233 S.E.2d 256 (1977); Smith v. Standard Fin. Corp., 143 Ga. Application. 390, 238 S.Elizabeth.2d 694 (1977); Mullins v. Oden & Sims Used Automobiles, Inc., 148 Ga. Software. 250, 251 S.Elizabeth.2d 65 (1978); Coppage v. Mellon Bank, 150 Ga. App. 92, 256 S.Elizabeth.2d 671 (1979); Parker v. George Thompson Ford, Inc., 83 F.Roentgen.D. 378 (N.D. Ga. 1979); Grover v. Vintage Borrowing Corp., 155 Ga. App. 759, 272 S.Elizabeth.2d 732 (1980); Inside re McLeod, 5 Bankr. 520 (Letter.D. Ga. 1980); From inside the re also Weaver, 5 Bankr. 522 (Letter.D. Ga. 1980).
- A cellular a mortgage price which failed to affirmatively misrepresent the brand new debtor's government legal pledges met the needs getting getting the security off federal preemption from state law focus ceilings. Grant v. GECC, 764 F.2d 1404 (11th Cir. 1985), cert. refuted, 476 U.S. 1124, 106 S. Ct. 1993, 90 L. Ed. 2d 673 (1986).
- Federal laws preempted the aid of O.C.G.Good. Art. dos, Ch. step one, T. 10 in order to agreements that happen to be built in conformity having statutes promulgated by Federal Financial Financial Panel. Moyer v. Citicorp Homeowners, Inc., 799 F.2d 1445 (11th Cir. 1986).
- Cellular property are included in the term motor vehicles contained in Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § 2 and you may and thus susceptible to Ga. L. 1967, p. 659, § step one. 1967 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 67-410.