O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-11-53 (2019)

Practice of law by judges

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) It shall be unlawful for any full-time juvenile court judge to engage in any practice of law outside his or her role as a juvenile court judge. (b) It shall be unlawful for a part-time judge of any juvenile court to engage directly or indirectly in the practice of law in his or her own name or in the name of another as a partner in any manner in any case, proceeding, or matter of any kind in the court to which he or she is assigned or in any other court in any case, proceeding, or any other matters of which it has pending jurisdiction or has had jurisdiction. (c) It shall be unlawful for any juvenile court judge, full time or part time, to give advice or counsel to any person on any matter of any kind whatsoever which has arisen directly or indirectly in court, except such advice or counsel as a judge is called upon to give while performing the duties of a juvenile court judge.

History

Code 1981, § 15-11-53, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242.

Annotations

Cross references. - Judges shall reg-

ulate their extra-judicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties, Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 5.

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Validity and application of state statute prohibiting judge from practicing law, 17 A.L.R.4th 829.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1985–1985 · leading case: Menard v. Fairchild, 328 S.E.2d 721 (Ga. 1985).
Menard v. Fairchild, 328 S.E.2d 721 (Ga. 1985). · cites it 16× “The Superior Court of Bibb County reversed, holding, among other things, that the termination of the father’s parental *276 rights to the child pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-53 1 precluded an award. An application to appeal was denied by the Court of Appeals and we granted certiorari…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.