Georgia § 9-10-31 Actions against certain codefendants residing in different counties; pleading requirements; application

Georgia Statutes

§ 9-10-31 — Actions against certain codefendants residing in different counties; pleading requirements; application

Georgia § 9-10-31

Title9

This text of Georgia § 9-10-31 (Actions against certain codefendants residing in different counties; pleading requirements; application) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

O.C.G.A. § 9-10-31 (2026).

Text

(a)The General Assembly finds that Paragraph IV of Section II of Article VI of the Georgia Constitution permits a trial and entry of judgment against a resident of Georgia in a county other than the county of the defendant's residence only if the Georgia resident defendant is a joint obligor, joint tort-feasor, joint promisor, copartner, or joint trespasser.

(b)Subject to the provisions of Code Section 9-10-31.1 , joint tort-feasors, obligors, or promisors, or joint contractors or copartners, residing in different counties, may be subject to an action as such in the same action in any county in which one or more of the defendants reside.

(c)In any action involving a medical malpractice claim as defined in Code Section 9-9-60 , a nonresident defendant may require that the case be transfe

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(a) The General Assembly finds that Paragraph IV of Section II of Article VI of the Georgia Constitution permits a trial and entry of judgment against a resident of Georgia in a county other than the county of the defendant's residence only if the Georgia resident defendant is a joint obligor, joint tort-feasor, joint promisor, copartner, or joint trespasser. (b) Subject to the provisions of Code Section 9-10-31.1 , joint tort-feasors, obligors, or promisors, or joint contractors or copartners, residing in different counties, may be subject to an action as such in the same action in any county in which one or more of the defendants reside. (c) In any action involving a medical malpractice claim as defined in Code Section 9-9-60 , a nonresident defendant may require that the case be transferred to the county of that defendant's residence if the tortious act upon which the medical malpractice claim is based occurred in the county of that defendant's residence. (d) If all defendants who reside in the county in which an action is pending are discharged from liability before or upon the return of a verdict by the jury or the court hearing the case without a jury, a nonresident defendant may require that the case be transferred to a county and court in which venue would otherwise be proper. If venue would be proper in more than one county, the plaintiff may elect from among the counties in which venue is proper the county and the court in which the action shall proceed. (e) Nothing in this Code section shall be deemed to alter or amend the pleading requirements of Chapter 11 of this title relating to the filing of complaints or answers.