O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-18-71 (2019)

Additional personnel and employees

✓ 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) The solicitor-general of a state court may employ such additional assistant solicitors-general, or other attorneys, investigators, parapro355

fessionals, clerical assistants, victim and witness assistance personnel, and other employees or independent contractors as may be provided for by local law or as may be authorized by the governing authority of the county. The solicitor-general shall define the duties and fix the title of any attorney or other employee of the solicitor-general’s office. (b) Personnel employed by the solicitor-general pursuant to this Code section shall be compensated by the county, the manner and amount of compensation to be paid to be fixed either by the solicitor-general with the approval of the governing authority of the county or as provided for by local Act. (c) All appointments of assistant solicitors-general and investigators pursuant to this Code section shall be in writing. (d) All assistant solicitors-general and investigators shall, in addition to any oath prescribed by Chapter 3 of Title 45, take and subscribe to the following oath: ‘‘I swear (or affirm) that I will well, faithfully, and impartially and without fear, favor, or affection discharge my duties as (assistant solicitor-general or investigator) of (here state the county) County.’’, which shall be filed in accordance with Chapter 3 of Title 45.

History

(Code 1981, § 15-18-71, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 748, § 2.)

Annotations

Code Commission notes. - Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1996, a comma

was added at the end of the first undesignated paragraph in subsection (d).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Termination of employee. - Employee who was hired by a county solicitor general under O.C.G.A. § 15-18-71 was not an employee of the county, and the solicitor general did not bring the employee into the county’s civil service sys-

tem under O.C.G.A. § 36-1-21(b). Therefore, the employee lacked a protected property interest in the job and could be terminated without cause and without a hearing. Thomas v. Lee, 286 Ga. 860, 691 S.E.2d 845 (2010).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2010–2025 · leading case: Thomas v. Lee, 691 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Thomas v. Lee, 691 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. 2010). · cites it 4× “In this case, Lee is an elected county officer who had the statutory authority to hire Thomas and define her duties and *863 responsibilities pursuant to OCGA § 15-18-71. 3 In addition to the power to hire Thomas and define her duties, Lee also had the option to attempt to bring…”

Teasley v. Freeman, 699 S.E.2d 39 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “860, 862-863 ( 691 SE2d 845 ) (2010) (solicitor-general “is an elected county officer who had the statutory authority to hire [her assistant] and define her duties and responsibilities” under OCGA § 15-18-71). Further, treating both “county employees” and “employees of elected…”

William Brandon Spencer v. Cherokee Cnty. Sch. Dist. (Ga. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Spencer fails to argue why the District’s citations to authority, whether correct or not, are facially insufficient for compliance with OCGA § 15-18-71 (d). Glisson v. Freeman, 243 Ga.”

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.