Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 9-10-14 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 9-10-14 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 9-10-14

TITLE 9 CIVIL PRACTICE

Section 10. Civil Practice and Procedure Generally, 9-10-1 through 9-10-204.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

9-10-14. Promulgation of form for use by inmates in actions against government.

  1. The Administrative Office of the Courts shall, with the approval of the Supreme Court, promulgate and from time to time amend as necessary a form or forms for use by inmates of state and local penal and correctional institutions in actions against the state and local governments and government agencies and officers. In addition to any other appropriate provisions, such form or forms shall clearly identify the nature of the action, the subject matter and disposition of all previous actions filed against any unit or officer of government by the inmate during his incarceration, the law and facts on which the action is based, the parties to be served, the parties against whom relief is requested, and the specific relief requested against each party. If an affidavit of indigency accompanies the pleading, it shall include a sworn financial statement which shall include but not be limited to any custodial account of the inmate with the institution wherein he is incarcerated.
  2. No clerk of any court shall accept for filing any action by an inmate of a state or local penal or correctional institution against the state or a local government or against any agency or officer of state or local government unless the complaint or other initial pleading is on a form or forms promulgated by the Administrative Office of the Courts and such form or forms are appropriately and legibly completed. Any inmate filing such an action may submit with the complaint or other initial pleading any additional matter in any form if the pleading includes the form or forms required by this Code section. If the pleading is accompanied by an affidavit of indigency, the clerk shall not accept the pleading for filing unless the pleading is also accompanied by a certification from the institution wherein the inmate is incarcerated that the financial statement correctly states the amount of funds in any and all custodial accounts of the inmate with the institution.
  3. Upon request of an inmate or the order of a court wherein an inmate has filed an action subject to this Code section, the officials in charge of a state or local institution may remit to the court amounts from an inmate's custodial account for payment of court costs, deposits, or filing fees. Such officials shall upon request of an inmate provide the certification required by subsection (b) of this Code section.
  4. The Administrative Office of the Courts shall cause to be printed such number of the forms provided for in this Code section as is necessary to furnish such forms to attorneys and to the Department of Corrections and local penal and correctional institutions for use by their inmates. Such forms shall be distributed to such institutions by the Administrative Office of the Courts without cost, and such forms shall be provided in reasonable numbers to inmates without cost. The cost of printing and distributing such forms shall be paid from funds appropriated to the judicial branch of government.

(Code 1981, §9-10-14, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 883, § 1.)

Code Commission notes.

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1985, "Department of Corrections" was substituted for "Department of Offender Rehabilitation" in the first sentence of subsection (d).

Editor's notes.

- Ga. L. 1985, p. 883, § 2, not codified by the General Assembly, provided that that Act would apply to actions presented for filing on or after July 1, 1985.

Law reviews.

- For article, "The Writ of Habeas Corpus in Georgia," see 12 Ga. St. B.J. 20 (2007).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Verification of habeas corpus petition.

- Where a prisoner completed a form provided by the Administrative Office of the Courts in filing the prisoner's habeas corpus petition, dismissal of the application was improper even though the verification statement did not comply with the traditional form. Heaton v. Lemacks, 266 Ga. 189, 466 S.E.2d 7 (1996).

No application to federal lawsuits.

- In a case in which a federal district court found that a state inmate's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc, were time-barred, the inmate was not entitled to an equitable tolling. The inmate's contention that prison officials refused to provide the inmate the appropriate form to file a state court action did not warrant equitable tolling because O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14 did not apply to federal lawsuits. Price v. Owens, 634 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (N.D. Ga. 2009).

Construction of terms.

- Georgia General Assembly's use of that phrase "the Department of Corrections and local penal and correctional institutions for use by their inmates" in O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14(d) supports the conclusion that the phrase "state or local penal or correctional institution" used in subsection (b) refers only to those institutions located in Georgia. Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480, 738 S.E.2d 614 (2013).

No application to inmate not incarcerated in Georgia.

- Georgia Supreme Court dismissed an inmate's petition for a writ of mandamus because the inmate was not incarcerated in Georgia; thus, the filing requirements of O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14(b) were not applicable to the inmate, and the inmate should have filed the petition initially with a Georgia superior court. Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480, 738 S.E.2d 614 (2013).

Use of required form mandatory.

- An inmate's complaint for mandamus relief against a state prison warden and the commissioner of the department of corrections should not have been permitted to proceed as the inmate failed to use the form required by O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14(b); the language of the statute was unambiguous and did not provide for any exceptions. Donald v. Price, 283 Ga. 311, 658 S.E.2d 569 (2008).

Statute does not provide exceptions to form requirement.

- Clerk of court acts contrary to the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14(b) when the clerk accepts for filing a complaint or initial pleading against a Georgia agency or official that is not in accord with the statute's requirements; the statutory language is unambiguous and does not provide for any exceptions: the clerk of a Georgia court is not to docket a mandamus petition without the statutorily required form. Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480, 738 S.E.2d 614 (2013).

Cited in King v. State, 268 Ga. 384, 493 S.E.2d 189 (1997).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

19A Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Penal and Correctional Institutions, § 3.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 9-10-14

Total Results: 6  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

White v. Georgia Power Co., 227 S.E.2d 385 (Ga. 1976).

Cited 57 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jul 15, 1976 | 237 Ga. 341

Copy

Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480 (Ga. 2013).

Cited 54 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 18, 2013 | 738 S.E.2d 614, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 283

...order Brian Owens, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections, to award Gay additional pre-trial sentence credit.1 Gay initially filed his petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County; however, the clerk of that court, citing OCGA § 9-10-14 (b), returned his petition to him without filing it. After reviewing our jurisdiction, we do not strike the petition from our docket for failure to meet the requirements of OCGA § 9-10-14 (b); rather, we dismiss Gay’s petition because his petition for a writ of mandamus is one that should be filed initially in superior court....
...s petition filed in this Court falls within the *481“extremely rare” category is the issue whether Gay’s petition should be stricken from the docket of this Court because it was improperly accepted for filing by this Court in violation of OCGA § 9-10-14 (b). OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) prohibits a clerk of any court from accepting for filing any action by an inmate of a state or local penal or correctional institution......
...utions located beyond the borders of Georgia who are seeking access to Georgia’s courts. If the latter, there arises the additional question of whether Gay was denied access to the forms. A clerk of court acts contrary to the requirements of OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) when the clerk accepts for filing a complaint or initial pleading against a Georgia agency or official that is not in accord with the statute’s requirements....
...311 (658 SE2d 569) (2008). Today, we examine who is required to use the statutorily-required forms, i.e., whether an inmate incarcerated in a penal institution of another state is “an inmate of a state or local penal or correctional institution . . .” under OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) and is therefore required to use the AOC forms when seeking access to Georgia courts. “ ‘In all interpretations of statutes, the courts shall look diligently for the intention of the General Assembly’ (OCGA § 1-3-1 (a)), giving ‘ordinary signification’ to all words that are not terms of art....
...and criminal justice agencies in other states”); and 50-3-1 (b) (1) (makes it unlawful to defile a publicly-owned monument to the military service of military personnel of Georgia or the several states of the United States). The General Assembly’s failure to include similar expansive language in OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) leads us to conclude the General Assembly intended the statute to cover only those inmates of state and local penal or correctional institutions located in Georgia. Further supporting our construction of the statute is the content of subsection (d) of OCGA § 9-10-14....
...local penal or correctional institution” used in subsection (b) refers only to those institutions located in Georgia. Since Gay is not incarcerated in a state or local penal or correctional institution located in Georgia, the requirements of OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) are not applicable to him....
...it is hereby dismissed. Brown v. Johnson, supra, 251 Ga. 436. The petition must be filed initially in superior court. See id. at 437. Upon submission to a superior court for filing, it is not subject to return to Gay without filing pursuant to OCGA § 9-10-14 (b) as long as Gay is not incarcerated in a state or local penal institution located in Georgia. Decided February 18, 2013. Christopher D....
Copy

Donald v. Price, 658 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. 2008).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 10, 2008 | 283 Ga. 311, 8 Fulton County D. Rep. 762, 8 FCDR 762

...discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 42-12-8. Appellants contend that the trial court erred by allowing Price's complaint to proceed even though he failed to use the form promulgated by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), as required by OCGA § 9-10-14(b)....
...ted by the [AOC]. . . . This language is unambiguous and does not provide for any exceptions. In this case, however, the clerk of the trial court did accept Price's mandamus petition for filing and thereby acted "contrary to the requirements of OCGA § 9-10-14(b)....
...As the trial court itself found, the clerk "should not have docketed this complaint absent the proper form." If the clerk should not have docketed the complaint, then the trial court should not have considered it as a viable pleading. Appellants raised the failure to comply with the mandate of OCGA § 9-10-14(b) as a defense in both a timely answer and a subsequent motion to dismiss....
...ring re-submission on the appropriate form. However, if Price had used the AOC form, there would not *571 have been any year-long delay in the valid initiation of this action. More importantly, if the clerk had complied with the duty imposed by OCGA § 9-10-14(b), the invalid pleading would not have been pending in the trial court for any length of time whatever. The language of OCGA § 9-10-14(b) is mandatory, the failure of the clerk to comply with the statutory requirement was timely raised by way of defense, and the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the action without prejudice....
Copy

Heaton v. Lemacks, 466 S.E.2d 7 (Ga. 1996).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 22, 1996 | 266 Ga. 189, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 283

...Contrary to the state's assertion, Heaton's subsequent transfer to the custody of the Department of Corrections does not moot his appeal. [1] It is the duty of the department as custodian to produce the petitioner as the superior court may direct. [2] 2. OCGA § 9-10-14(a) provides that the AOC shall promulgate, and the Supreme Court shall approve, forms for inmates of state and local correctional institutions to use in actions against state and local governments, agencies, and officers....
Copy

Jones v. Henderson, 684 S.E.2d 265 (Ga. 2009).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 28, 2009 | 285 Ga. 804, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 3060

...ate court of record may challenge his conviction and sentence through habeas corpus proceedings, generally filed in the county of incarceration, but must comply with the procedures governing such actions, see OCGA § 9-14-40 et seq. Pursuant to OCGA § 9-10-14(a), the Administrative Office of the Courts has promulgated, and this Court has approved, forms for inmates of state and local correctional institutions to use in actions against state and local governments, agencies, and officers. Heaton v. Lemacks, 266 Ga. 189, 466 S.E.2d 7 (1996). OCGA § 9-10-14(b) provides that a clerk of court shall not file an inmate's complaint against the state or a local government unless the pleading is on the appropriate form and is appropriately completed....
Copy

King v. State, 268 Ga. 384 (Ga. 1997).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 15, 1997 | 493 S.E.2d 189, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 3407

Sears, Justice. Because the appellant, Etheridge King, an inmate, failed to use a form promulgated by the Administrative Office of the Courts in preparing his complaint,1 and because the clerk of superior court, contrary to the requirements of OCGA § 9-10-14 (b), accepted King’s complaint for filing even though King did not use the proper form, we conclude that the trial court did not err in dismissing King’s action without prejudice. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Thompson, J, not participating. OCGA § 9-10-14 (a), (b)....