To maintain a suit to quiet title, the plaintiff must assert that he holds the current record title or current prescriptive title to the property in dispute. Smith v. Ga. Kaolin Co. , 269 Ga. 475, 477 (2), 498 S.E.2d 266 (1998) ; In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn. , 244 Ga. 515, 518, 260 S.E.2d 897 (1979). "Otherwise, he possesses no title at all, but only an expectancy[.]"

To state a claim for quiet title relief, a plaintiff must allege more than a right to acquire title; it must allege that it presently holds current title or current prescriptive title. In re River mist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 518 ( 260 SE2d 897) (1979); OCGA § 23-3-61. Compare GHG, Inc. v. Bryan, 275 Ga. 336 (1) ( 566 SE2d 662) (2002) (petition to quiet title established current title based upon recorded and unrecorded instruments as well as by prescription) with Smith v. Georgia Kaolin Co., 264 Ga. 755, 756 (2) ( 449 SE2d 85) (1994) (despite relaxed standards of Quiet Title Act, plaintiff must have more than the possibility of an interest in title to bring an action to quiet title).

The trial court dismissed the quia timet action as to the 20-acre parcel since Mr. Burnett had not been able to assert a claim of current record title or current prescriptive title. See In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 518 ( 260 SE2d 897) (1979). This ruling has not been appealed.

In that case, "[n]o evidence which might be introduced within the framework of the complaint could sustain a grant of the relief sought." In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 520 ( 260 S.E.2d 897) (1979). Bryan's petition established a claim of current title based upon a series of recorded and unrecorded instruments as well as by prescription, and otherwise satisfied the statutory requirements.

[Cit.]" In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 517 ( 260 S.E.2d 897) (1979). "[E]ven under the relaxed standard of the new law a plaintiff must assert that he holds some current record title or current prescriptive title, in order to maintain his suit.

See OCGA § 23-3-60, et seq.; In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515 ( 260 S.E.2d 897) (1979). The trial court further held that submission to the terms of the Georgia Property Owners' Association Act, OCGA § 44-3-220, et seq., was a prerequisite for future collection of assessments.

To withstand a motion to dismiss, a person must assert a claim of either current record title or current prescriptive title. In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 518 ( 260 S.E.2d 897) (1979). 3. A party is entitled to summary judgment if "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact" and "the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law."

Republic incorrectly asserts that In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., Inc. adopted this standard for conventional quiet title petitions as well. 244 Ga. 515, 518, 260 S.E.2d 897 (1979) Although the Supreme Court in Rivermist cited portions of the predecessor statutes to both OCGA § 23-3-40 and OCGA § 23-3-61, it also specified that the petitioner in that case claimed standing to quiet title against all the world. Rivermist , supra, 244 Ga. at 517-518, 260 S.E.2d 897.

(Emphasis in original.) In re Rivermist Homeowners Assn., 244 Ga. 515, 518 ( 260 SE2d 897) (1979). In this case, plaintiffs do not assert that they have title to the property at issue.

See, e.g., In re Rivermist Homeowners Ass'n., Inc., 244 Ga. 515, 518, 260 S.E.2d 897 (1979) ("[A] plaintiff [in a quiet title action] must assert that he holds some current record title or current prescriptive title, in order to maintain his suit."). This action, however, was brought under federal law, and we offer no opinion as to whether this action remains viable under that body of law.