– To possess post discussing government specifics-in-credit conditions and their reference to county laws and regulations, select six Ga. St. B. J. 19 (1969). Rev. 281 (1978). To possess blog post, «Brand new Federalization and Privatization out of Social Consumer Security Laws regarding You: The Impact on Lawsuits and you may Enforcement,» look for 24 Ga. St. You.L. Rev. 663 (2008). L. Rev. 454 (1975).
- Standard Thought
- Government Preemption
Ford Engine Borrowing Co
– New business out of a mobile domestic arrives inside the arrangements of Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § 1. Holder v. Brock, 129 Ga. Application. 732, 200 S.E.2d 912 (1973), overruled towards almost every other grounds, Tucker v. Chung Facility of Karate, Inc., 142 Ga. Application. 818, 237 S.Age.2d 223 (1977); Smith v. Community Nat’l Lender, 141 Ga. Software. 19, 232 S.Age.2d 367 (1977); Porter v. Midland-Protector Co., 145 Ga. Software. 262, 243 S.Elizabeth.2d 595, rev’d with the other grounds, 242 Ga. step one, 247 S.Age.2d 743 (1978).
Getting note discussing import fees in home mortgage assumptions from inside the reference on quick installment loans Ottumwa the Georgia usury regulations, find 9 Ga
– The fresh new mere exposure regarding an acceleration clause is not violative away from Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § step one. Eco-friendly v. Citizens & S. Lender, 153 Ga. Software. 342, 265 S.Age.2d 286 (1980).
– A beneficial «documentary preparation» payment explicitly defined as such as for example in a car loans price and you may added to the new unpaid balance of your own purchase price while the an «other costs» wasn’t a loans charges since it try charged to all or any consumer purchasers (both cash and you may borrowing from the bank). Thus, the latest offer complied that have state and federal law. Ferris v. Chrysler Borrowing from the bank Corp., 764 F.2d 1475 (11th Cir.), rehearing rejected, 770 F.2d 1084 (11th Cir. 1985).
– Georgia law, in the place of South carolina laws, governed a mobile home shopping fees conversion package joined to your from the South carolina customers having a Georgia dealer because the package consisted of a choice of rules supply appearing that offer shall be construed in accordance with the rules of the county where the new seller’s bar or nightclub is actually receive. Moyer v. Citicorp Home owners, Inc., 799 F.2d 1445 (11th Cir. 1986).
Cited in the System Deal Co. v. Sawyer, 123 Ga. Software. 207, 180 S.E.2d 282 (1971); Geiger Fin. Co. v. Graham, 123 Ga. App. 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 (5th Cir. 1976); Michael jordan v. , 141 Ga. Application. 280, 233 S.Elizabeth.2d 256 (1977); Smith v. Standard Fin. Corp., 143 Ga. App. 390, 238 S.E.2d 694 (1977); Mullins v. Oden & Sims Made use of Cars, Inc., 148 Ga. Software. 250, 251 S.Age.2d 65 (1978); Coppage v. Mellon Bank, 150 Ga. Application. 92, 256 S.Elizabeth.2d 671 (1979); Parker v. George Thompson Ford, Inc., 83 F.R.D. 378 (Letter.D. Ga. 1979); Grover v. Vintage Credit Corp., 155 Ga. Application. 759, 272 S.Age.2d 732 (1980); Inside the re also McLeod, 5 Bankr. 520 (Letter.D. Ga. 1980); Within the lso are Weaver, 5 Bankr. 522 (N.D. Ga. 1980).
– A cellular a home loan offer hence failed to affirmatively misrepresent the newest debtor’s federal statutory claims met the requirements for getting the safeguards regarding federal preemption of county law desire ceilings. Give v. GECC, 764 F.2d 1404 (11th Cir. 1985), cert. refused, 476 U.S. 1124, 106 S. Ct. 1993, ninety L. Ed. 2d 673 (1986).
– Federal legislation preempted making use of O.C.G.A beneficial. Ways. 2, Ch. step one, T. ten so you’re able to agreements which have been built in conformity which have guidelines promulgated by the Federal Financial Financial Board. Moyer v. Citicorp Homeowners, Inc., 799 F.2d 1445 (11th Cir. 1986).
– Mobile land are part of the expression cars consisted of within the Ga. L. 1967, p. 674, § dos and you will and thus susceptible to Ga. L. 1967, p. 659, § step one. 1967 Op. Att’y Gen. Zero. 67-410.