Hamilton State Bank v. Nelson, 296 Ga. 572

Jimmy R. Nelson and Dolph Nelson, Jr., members of an LLC and shareholders of a corporation, executed promissory notes to Hamilton State Bank secured by real property, accounts receivable, inventory, furniture, and fixtures used in a retail store.
The Bank obtained two large judgments against the Nelsons on the notes; appeals on those judgments were pending.
The Bank filed a verified complaint and an emergency motion seeking appointment of a receiver, alleging threats to collateral (store relocation and changes in ownership/corporate structure) and involvement of third‑party creditors.
The trial court denied the receivership but ordered the Nelsons to turn over keys and possession of the real property to the Bank.
The Bank appealed only the order directing turnover of possession (it did not challenge the receivership denial) arguing the court lacked authority to force the Bank to take possession.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court could order the Nelsons to tender possession of the property to the Bank	Bank: Court erred by directing turnover; Bank does not want immediate possession and cannot be compelled to accept it	Nelsons/Trial court: Order directed Nelsons to tender possession to Bank to protect collateral	Trial court may direct tender of possession, but tender alone does not effect transfer without acceptance by transferee; any error in ordering tender did not harm the Bank
Whether the court could effectively compel the Bank to accept possession	Bank: Court lacked authority to require Bank to accept possession	Trial court: Order was addressed to Nelsons to surrender possession	Court: Order did not require Bank to accept possession; mere tender imposes no transfer absent acceptance
Whether the Bank suffered reversible harm from the turnover order	Bank: Objected to being the recipient of possession	Trial court/Nelsons: Order simply required tender by Nelsons	Court: No harm because acceptance was not ordered; thus Bank cannot complain
Whether denial of receivership affects appeal of turnover order	Bank: Did not appeal denial of receivership; focused on turnover	Trial court: Denied receivership but ordered turnover	Court: Bank’s appeal limited to turnover; holding affirmed as to turnover issue

Gwinnett County v. McManus, 294 Ga. 702 (clarifies that a court cannot force a party to accept possession)
Smiway, Inc. v. Dept. of Transp., 178 Ga. App. 414 (tender of possession does not transfer possession absent acceptance)
Lamb v. Gorman, 16 Ga. App. 663 (same principle in landlord‑tenant context)
Ledsinger v. Burke, 113 Ga. 74 (early statement that tender requires acceptance to transfer possession)
Martin v. Hendon, 224 Ga. 221 (party cannot complain about an order directed only to another party)
Rush v. Southern Property Mgmt., 121 Ga. App. 360 (same principle that a non‑directed party lacks standing to complain)