Georgia House Judiciary Committee advances eviction-service fix, military protective orders; approves deed-notice bill after amendments

The Georgia House Judiciary Committee met (date not specified) and approved a package of court- and property-related measures while holding hearings on several others.

The most immediate actions included: moving a cleanup to eviction-service law to the House rules committee after deleting aviation provisions; approving a bill that authorizes military protective orders to be entered by Georgia National Guard military judges; advancing a bill to create a 45-day notice/hold process when certain deeds are recorded (intended to deter deed-theft), and approving a statutory framework authorizing electronic filing in probate courts. The committee also heard a proposed change to attorney-lien law in divorce cases and a broader proposal to limit how many single-family houses or multifamily complexes large business enterprises may hold; both of those items were treated as hearing-only and were not voted on.

Eviction service (House Bill 270) Committee members approved a version of House Bill 270 after a friendly amendment that removed the bill—s aviation provisions and renumbered sections. The remaining text would align OCGA 44-7-51 with Rule 9-11-4 to allow private process servers to serve eviction papers consistent with longstanding practice, a change described by a committee witness as a response to Mancuso v. Caedals (Jan. 2024). The bill sponsor asked that the eviction-service provision take effect upon the governor—s signature or on standard effective dates. The committee voted in favor of the amended bill.

Military protective orders for guardsmen (LC461038 / House bill referenced) The committee approved legislation authorizing entry of military protective orders by a Georgia National Guard military judge. Witnesses said the orders would apply to members 24 hours a day, seven days a week regardless of duty status and would be enforceable through state criminal processes and the Guard—s disciplinary provisions. Committee discussion clarified that (1) the procedure would apply when both petitioner and respondent are members of the Guard, (2) contempt or military…