Georgia

Warning: The following opinion is provided for purposes of discussion only. We have not Shepardized™ this opinion, and do not know the subsequent disposition of this case nor whether the effect of the opinion has been overruled or superceded by other law.

Prodigy Centers/Atlanta No. 1 L.P. v. T-C Associates,
147 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 07/29/1998)

U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

No. 95-9448

147 F.3d 1324, 82 A.F.T.R.2d 98, 1998.C11.390

July 29, 1998

PRODIGY CENTERS/ATLANTA NO. 1 L.P.; PRODIGY CENTERS NO. 2 L.P., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES,
v.
T-C ASSOCIATES, LTD., ETC., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D. C. Docket No. 1:95-CV-1157-RHH

Before: Birch, Black and Carnes, Circuit Judges.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Per Curiam

PUBLISH

In this case, the government and T-C Associates ("TCA") assert liens on a distribution to Prodigy Child Development Centers ("PCDC") from a limited partnership. Although TCA obtained a judgment against PCDC before the government recorded its tax lien in 1993, the government argues that TCA's judgment lien did not attach to PCDC's partnership interest until TCA obtained a charging order in 1994, because PCDC's partnership interest was a "chose in action." After determining that the issue of whether the partnership interest was a chose in action was dispositive of this appeal but unsettled as a matter of Georgia law, we certified the following question to the Supreme Court of Georgia:

DOES A PARTNERSHIP INTEREST IN A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP CONSTITUTE A CHOSE IN ACTION?

Prodigy Centers/Atlanta No. 1 L.P. v. T-C Assoc., Ltd., 127 F.3d 1021, 1024 (11th Cir. 1997). In answer, the Supreme Court of Georgia has decided that "a `partnership interest' is a chose in action." Prodigy Centers/Atlanta v. T-C Assoc., No. S98Q0326, __ S.E.2d __, __ (Ga. June 8, 1998). Since judgment liens generally do not attach to choses in action under Georgia law absent a collateral charging order to garnishment, see, e.g., id. at __ n. 3, the government is correct that TCA's lien did not attach until 1994, well after the government recorded its own lien. Therefore, we REVERSE the district court's grant of summary judgment for TCA and REMAND with instructions that the district court enter summary judgment for the government.

The legal opinions are a matter of public record (that's how we got them), and as such there can be no defamation for republishing them. Sometimes, however, legal opinions are reversed, vacated, or significantly modified, etc., and we do not discover this fact until somebody points it out to us. As we do not desire to publish inaccurate or outdated information, if a legal opinion has been reversed, vacated, or significantly modified, please advise us of this fact immediately, by fax to (877) 698-0678 or you may also send regular postal correspondence to Riser Adkisson LLP at 1827 Powers Ferry Road, Building One, Suite 200, Atlanta GA 30339.