Baranan v. Georgia State Bd. of Nursing Home Administrators, 236 S.E.2d 71 (Ga. 1977). · Go Syfert
Search
Baranan v. Georgia State Bd. of Nursing Home Administrators, 236 S.E.2d 71 (Ga. 1977). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Beauchamp v. Knight (ga, 1991-10-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Beauchamp v. Knight
Ga. · 1991 · confidence medium
(Relative to appeals which seek to raise the constitutional issue, see Fews v. State, 1 Ga. App. 122 ( 58 SE 64 ) (1907); Cox v. State, 19 Ga. App. 283 ( 91 SE 422 ) (1917).) “To hold that the Court of Appeals must lose jurisdiction over [such cases] . . . would be practically to enable any litigant ... to select the appellate forum in which he might prefer his case to be determined.” [Cit.] See also Baranan v. Ga. State Bd. of Nursing Home Admrs., 239 Ga. 122, 123 ( 236 SE2d 71 ) (1977), which we transferred to the Court of Appeals, holding: It is clear therefore that the injunction issue…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Krystal Co. v. Carter
Ga. · 1986 · confidence medium
“It is clear therefore that the injunction issue is one of mere form and that the substantive question on appeal is a legal question over which the Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction.” Baranan v. Ga. State Bd. of Nursing Home Admrs., 239 Ga. 122, 123 ( 236 SE2d 71 ) (1977).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ayers v. Mobley
Ga. · 1982 · confidence medium
Pace Construction Corp. v. Houdaille Industries, 245 Ga. 696 ( 266 SE2d 504 ) (1980); Baranan v. Ga. State Bd. of Nursing Home Admrs., 239 Ga. 122, 123 ( 236 SE2d 71 ) (1977).
cited Cited as authority (rule) PACE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION v. Houdaille-Duval-Wright Division, Houdaille Industries, Inc.
Ga. · 1980 · confidence medium
Baranan v. Ga. State Bd. of Nursing Home Administrators, 239 Ga. 122, 123 ( 236 SE2d 71 ) (1977).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Baranan v. State Board of Nursing Home Administrators
Ga. Ct. App. · 1977 · confidence medium
This order was appealed to the Supreme Court which held that "[t]he only substantive issue on appeal related to the constitutionality of the above rules. . . [and it] is a legal question over which the Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction.” Baranan v. State Bd. of Nursing Home Admrs., 239 Ga. 122, 123 ( 236 SE2d 71 ). 1.
discussed Cited "see" Zepp v. Mayor & Council of the City of Athens (2×)
Ga. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Baranan v. Ga. State Bd. of Nursing Home Administrators, 239 Ga. 122 ( 236 SE2d 71 ) (1977).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BARANAN
v.
GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATORS Et Al.
32181.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
May 25, 1977.
236 S.E.2d 71
1977 Ga. LEXIS 833
Thomas H. Antonion, for appellant., Aaron Baranan, in propria persona., Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, J. Michael Walls, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
Jordan.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
Per curiam.

Appellant filed a suit for declaratory judgment against the Georgia State Board of Nursing Home Administrators and James C. Metts, individually and as chairman of the board. The petition seeks to declare that[*123] certain portions of Ch. 393-5, amended of the rules of the Georgia State Board of Nursing Home Administrators are unconstitutional and void. Based upon such a declaration, he also seeks a permanent injunction. The trial court found the rules to be constitutional, granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, and denied appellant’s motion for summary judgment. This order is appealed.

Submitted April 8, 1977 Decided May 25, 1977. Thomas H. Antonion, for appellant. Aaron Baranan, in propria persona. Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, J. Michael Walls, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

The only substantive issue on appeal relates to the constitutionality of the above rules; therefore, the appeal is transferred to the Court of Appeals. The issue of any permanent injunction is ancillary to the declaratory relief, i.e., if the declaration is for the plaintiff, the injunction will issue, if it is against the plaintiff, it will be denied. It is clear therefore that the injunction issue is one of mere form and that the substantive question on appeal is a legal question over which the Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction.

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur, except Jordan, J., who dissents.