GA Code § 36-82-78 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 36 - Local Government|Chapter 82 - Bonds|Article 3 - Revenue Bonds|§ 36-82-78. Effect of Judgment of Validation

 If no appeal is filed within the time prescribed by law or if an appeal is filed and the judgment is affirmed on appeal, the judgment of the superior court confirming and validating the issuance of the bonds and the security therefor shall be forever conclusive against the governmental body upon the validity of such bonds and the security therefor.   (Ga. L. 1937, p. 761, § 14; Ga. L. 1966, p. 48, § 3.)   Law reviews.   - For annual survey of local government law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 289 (2005).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   Constitutionality.    - See Lawson v. City of Moultrie, 194 Ga. 699, 22 S.E.2d 592 (1942).   Conclusiveness of validation judgment.    - Judgment of the superior court validating revenue bonds under the Revenue Bond Law (O.C.G.A. Art. 3, Ch. 82, T. 36), unexcepted to, or affirmed on review, is conclusive against the municipality and the citizens of the municipality upon all questions, including the constitutionality of the statute under which the proceedings are had. Cox v. Georgia Educ. Auth., 225 Ga. 542, 170 S.E.2d 240 (1969).    Validation judgment regarding revenue bonds for a county's acquisition of a hospital, which had been found to be illegal, was nonetheless conclusive because the judgment had not been appealed and sale of the revenue bonds could not be enjoined. Turpen v. Rabun County Bd. of Comm'rs, 251 Ga. App. 505, 554 S.E.2d 727 (2001).   Validation order conclusive on intergovernmental contract's legitimacy.    - See AMBAC Indem. Corp. v. Akridge, 262 Ga. 773, 425 S.E.2d 637, cert. denied, 510 U.S. 817, 114 S. Ct. 69, 126 L. Ed. 2d 38 (1993).   Action not barred as collateral attack.    - Taxpayer's petition seeking a declaration that the valuation method a county board of assessors and the development authority of the county used for leasehold estates arising from a local development authority sale-leaseback bond transaction was illegal was not barred for being a collateral attack on concluded bond validation proceedings because the challenge to the memoranda of agreement that set forth the tax assessment formula at issue would only constitute a prohibited collateral attack on a concluded bond validation proceeding if the memoranda were specifically adjudicated in the proceedings and held valid by the bond judgment, and the board and authority had to put forth evidence that the applicable bond validation orders did in fact expressly rule upon each memorandum of agreement. Moreover, even if the taxpayer was barred from challenging the tax agreements on concluded bond transactions, the taxpayer also sought an injunction to prohibit the use of the formula in future bond agreements. Sherman v. Fulton County Bd. of Assessors, 288 Ga. 88, 701 S.E.2d 472 (2010).   Validation not conclusive as to tax exemption as public property.    - Two bond validation orders pertaining to a hospital authority's establishment of a continuing care retirement center did not conclusively determine, for purposes of O.C.G.A. § 48-5-41(a)(1)(A), that the property was public property exempt from ad valorem taxation; remand was required for the trial court to address taxability. Columbus Board of Tax Assessors v. Medical Ctr. Hosp. Auth., 302 Ga. 358, 806 S.E.2d 525 (2017).    Cited in Gibbs v. City of Social Circle, 191 Ga. 422, 12 S.E.2d 335 (1940); Miller v. Columbus, 229 Ga. 234, 190 S.E.2d 535 (1972); Ferdinand v. City of Atlanta, 285 Ga. 121, 674 S.E.2d 309 (2009); Sherman v. Atlanta Indep. Sch. Sys., 293 Ga. 268, 744 S.E.2d 26 (2013).   RESEARCH REFERENCES   Am. Jur. 2d.   - 64 Am. Jur. 2d, Public Securities and Obligations, § 373 et seq.