O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-18-67 (2019)

Compensation

✓ 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) Solicitors-general of state courts shall be compensated from county funds as provided by local law.

(b) The county governing authority is authorized to supplement the minimum compensation to be paid to the solicitor-general of the state court of that county as provided by local law, but no solicitor-general’s compensation or supplement shall be decreased during his or her term of office.

History

(Code 1981, § 15-18-67, enacted by Ga. L. 1997, p. 1319, § 18.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Compensation dispute. - Trial court correctly held that a county solicitor general was improperly compensated beginning in July 2007 but erred in calculating the back pay due to the solicitor-general as of January 1, 2009, based on an amended local law because the amended

local law irreconcilably conflicted with O.C.G.A. § 15-18-67(b), which prohibited the reduction of a solicitor-general’s compensation during the solicitor-general’s term of office. Inagawa v. Fayette County, 291 Ga. 715, 732 S.E.2d 421 (2012).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2012–2012 · leading case: Inagawa v. Fayette Cnty., 732 S.E.2d 421 (Ga. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Inagawa v. Fayette Cnty., 732 S.E.2d 421 (Ga. 2012). · cites it 12× “2 Inagawa asserted further that, had he been receiving the correct compensation under the 1994 Act at the time the 2008 Act went into effect, the 2008 Act would have had the effect of decreasing his compensation during his term of office in violation of OCGA § 15-18-67 (b) (“no…”
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.