Constitutionality.

- This section was not violative of either the letter or the spirit of the Constitution. Henderson v. Pope, 39 Ga. 361 (1869); Drawdy v. Littlefield, 75 Ga. 215 (1885); Bivins v. Bank of Richland, 109 Ga. 342, 34 S.E. 602 (1899).

There is no provision for appointment of member of the bar as judge pro hac vice in a criminal case. Castleberry v. State, 68 Ga. 49 (1881).

Clerk need not attempt to secure services of other judge.

- It is not essential to the validity of the act of the clerk in selecting the attorney to try the case that an effort should have been made by the judge to procure the services of another judge; or that the parties must have attempted and failed to agree in the selection of an attorney to try the case; or that the order appointing the attorney should first be spread upon the minutes of the court; or that one of the parties who was absent at the time of the selection by the clerk was not notified by the adversary of the party's intention to demand that the clerk select an attorney to preside in the case. Beck v. Henderson, 76 Ga. 360 (1886); Steam Laundry Co. v. Thompson, 91 Ga. 47, 16 S.E. 198 (1892); Robinson v. McArthur, 166 Ga. 611, 144 S.E. 19 (1928).

Judge pro hac vice cannot be selected by disqualified judge. Bedingfield v. First Nat'l Bank, 4 Ga. App. 197, 61 S.E. 30 (1908).

Deputy clerk may make appointment if clerk absent. Steam Laundry Co. v. Thompson, 91 Ga. 47, 16 S.E. 198 (1892).

State court judge may preside when properly designated.

- State court judge is a member of the bar, and when properly designated, is competent to preside in the seat of a senior superior court judge who is unable to preside due to illness. Fielding v. Fielding, 236 Ga. 114, 223 S.E.2d 85 (1976).

Selecting senior judge to hear case.

- This section authorized parties' litigant to select any judge of superior courts emeritus (now senior judge) to preside in the cause. Chambers v. Wynn, 217 Ga. 381, 122 S.E.2d 571 (1961).

Senior judge without jurisdiction to certify bill of exceptions.

- Because a superior court judge emeritus (now senior judge) has not been granted constitutional or statutory authority to serve as a superior court judge, except when the Governor is authorized to call upon the judge to do so or the judge is selected to serve as such in a civil case under former Code 1933, §§ 24-2625, 24-2626, §§ 24-2623, or 24-2624 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-6-13 or O.C.G.A. § 15-6-14) it necessarily followed that a superior court judge emeritus (now senior judge) not within these exceptions is wholly without jurisdiction or power to certify a bill of exceptions (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 5-6-49 and5-6-50) in a case tried by a superior court judge. Chambers v. Wynn, 217 Ga. 381, 122 S.E.2d 571 (1961).

Judge pro hac vice has all powers of regular judge over case wherein the judge presides, not only with respect to the jury trial of the case, but also with respect to matters of review and appeal, and other matters subsequent to the judgment. Norris v. Pollard, 75 Ga. 358 (1885); Gainesville Buggy & Wagon Co. v. Morrow, 23 Ga. App. 268, 98 S.E. 100 (1919).

Judge pro hac vice has all powers of regular judge when, by consent, verdict was not received by regular judge. Roberts v. Bank of LaGrange, 23 Ga. App. 660, 99 S.E. 145 (1919), later appeal, 25 Ga. App. 343, 103 S.E. 176 (1920).

Judge pro hac vice may hear motion for new trial in superior court. Clayton & Co. v. Wallace, 41 Ga. 268 (1870).

Decision subject to review.

- Writ of error (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 5-6-49 and5-6-50) will lie from the Supreme Court to correct such errors as may be committed by the pro hac vice judge holding the superior court in a case in which the judge of the circuit is an interested party. Henderson v. Pope, 39 Ga. 361 (1869).

Objection to person appointed by clerk to act as judge must be made to that judge. Kimbrough v. Pitts, 63 Ga. 496 (1879).

Necessity of appearance of appointment on records.

- If appointment of judge pro hac vice does not appear on the record, the judge's refusal to dismiss the case will be reversed on appeal. Worsham v. Murchison, 66 Ga. 715 (1881).

Attorney acting as judge pro hac vice not required to be sworn as such. Reeves v. Graffling, 67 Ga. 512 (1881).

Cited in Paulk v. Smith, 56 Ga. App. 53, 192 S.E. 68 (1937); Dupriest v. Reese, 104 Ga. App. 805, 123 S.E.2d 161 (1961); Nims v. Otter, 188 Ga. App. 516, 373 S.E.2d 396 (1988).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 46 Am. Jur. 2d, Judges, §§ 168, 214.

C.J.S.

- 48A C.J.S., Judges, § 163.

ALR.

- Power of judge pro tempore or special judge, after expiration of period for which he was appointed, to entertain motion or assume further jurisdiction in case previously tried before him, 134 A.L.R. 1129.

Right of party, in course of litigation, to challenge title or authority of judge or of person acting as judge, 144 A.L.R. 1207.