Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Vesta Holdings I, v. Tax Commr. of Fulton

259 Ga. App. 717 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Vesta Holdings I, v. Tax Commr. of Fulton

6 Citing cases

  1. Scott v. Vesta Holdings I, LLC

    275 Ga. App. 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 5 times
    Noting that the tax commissioner was an ex-officio sheriff pursuant to OCGA § 48–5–137

    Alexander Investment Group, Inc. v. Jarvis, [supra, 263 Ga. at 490, n. 3]." Vesta Holdings I, LLC v. Tax Commr. of Fulton County, 259 Ga. App. 717, 718 (1) ( 578 SE2d 293) (2003). The significance of this footing is that Vesta Holdings's tax executions had higher priority than any other claims or liens except those for state taxes and for county taxes, if any, which were older than those held by Vesta Holdings.

  2. Tallahassee State Bank v. Macon

    730 S.E.2d 646 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 1 times
    Discussing merger doctrine

    ” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Vesta Holdings I v. Tax Commr. of Fulton County, 259 Ga.App. 717, 720(2)(b), 578 S.E.2d 293 (2003). The Macons' security deed expressly states that it is inferior to TSB's security deed. And, even if the Macons' security deed did not state that it was inferior, the fact that it was recorded after TSB's security deed results in it being the inferior deed.

  3. Dehco, Inc. v. Fulton Cnty. Tax Comm'r

    A12A0600 (Ga. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2012)

    Because the trial court correctly held that Dehco was responsible for the taxes, we affirm. The relevant facts are undisputed, and we review the court's ruling de novo. Vesta Holdings I v. Tax Commr. of Fulton County, 259 Ga. App. 717 (578 SE2d 293) (2003). On January 1, 2008, Dehco owned the property at issue.

  4. Greene County Board of Commissioners v. Higdon

    277 Ga. App. 350 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 4 times
    Finding no abuse of legislative discretion and therefore no grounds on which the trial court could set aside the determination of the local governing authority to assess a tax for the purpose of funding hospital-based care within a special tax district

    (Citation omitted.) Vesta Holdings I v. Tax Commr. of Fulton County, 259 Ga. App. 717 ( 578 SE2d 293) (2003). The Taxpayers withdrew their argument that a referendum was required on the assessment.

  5. Jackson v. Wellington & Assocs., LLC

    389 F. Supp. 3d 1199 (N.D. Ga. 2019)   Cited 6 times
    Relying on DLT List to find that a security deed to real property does not entitle the holder to excess funds from a tax sale

    Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 48-2-56, "[l]iens for taxes shall rank among themselves as follows: (1) Taxes due the state; (2) Taxes due counties of the state...." O.C.G.A. § 48-2-56 (b). "[B]y adopting this statute, the [Georgia] legislature intended to assign priority to tax liens based upon the status of the taxing entity, regardless of the date the lien was created." Vesta Holdings I v. Tax Comm'r, 259 Ga. App. 717, 719, 578 S.E.2d 293 (2003). Thus, pursuant to Georgia law, state tax liens take priority over those imposed by the county, thereby elevating only the state portion of PHH's 2012 Fulton County/Georgia Fi. Fa. above the Georgia Department of Revenue's claims.

  6. Dehco, Inc. v. Fulton Cnty. Tax Comm'r

    727 S.E.2d 531 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)

    Because the trial court correctly held that Dehco was responsible for the taxes, we affirm. The relevant facts are undisputed, and we review the court's ruling de novo. Vesta Holdings I v. Tax Commr. of Fulton County, 259 Ga.App. 717, 578 S.E.2d 293 (2003). On January 1, 2008, Dehco owned the property at issue.