O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-6-29.1 (2019)

The annual salary provided by Code Section 45-7-4 shall be paid by The Council of Superior Court Judges of Georgia in 12 equal monthly installments

✓ 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

(b) The annual salary shall be the total compensation to be paid by the state to the superior court judges and shall be in lieu of any and all other amounts to be paid from The Council of Superior Court Judges of Georgia, except as provided in Code Sections 15-6-29.1, 15-6-30, and

(c) When a new superior court judgeship is created by law for any judicial circuit, the new superior court judge shall upon taking office become entitled to and shall receive from the county or counties comprising the circuit the same county salary supplement, if any, then in effect for the other judge or judges of the judicial circuit. Such salary supplement for such new judge shall be authorized by this subsection and no other legislation or local legislation shall be required in order to authorize such salary supplement, but nothing in this Code section shall be construed to prohibit the enactment of local legislation relating to such salary supplements. A publication of notice of intention to introduce local legislation as provided for in Code Section 28-1-14 shall be required for any local legislation granting, changing the amount of, or removing a salary supplement; but no publication of notice of intention shall be required for a bill creating one or more new superior court judgeships.

History

Ga. L. 1904, p. 72, § 1; Civil Code 1910, § 323; Code 1933, § 24-2606; Ga. L. 1957, p. 273, §§ 1, 2, 3; Ga. L. 1962, p. 64, § 1; Ga. L. 1965, p. 528, § 1; Ga. L. 1969, p. 113, § 1; Ga. L. 1972, p. 1015, § 408; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1402, § 9.1; Ga. L. 1996, p. 405, § 3; Ga. L. 2008, p. 577, § 3/SB 396; Ga. L. 2015, p. 919, § 1-3/HB 279.

Annotations

Cross references. - Notice of intention to introduce local bills, § 28-1-14.

Law reviews. - For article discussing judicial compensation, see 14 Ga. St. B. J. 110 (1978). For article, ‘‘Annual Survey of Georgia Law: June 1, 2015 - May 31, 2016: Special Contribution: Open Chambers Revisited: Demystifying the Inner Workings and Culture of the Georgia Court of Appeals,’’ see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 1 (2016).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Stokes v. Fortson, 234 F. Supp. 575 (N.D. Ga. 1964). OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Method of payment if operating account of superior court judges insufficient. - If there is a surplus in the operating account of the district attorneys, but if a warrant were paid in the full amount of the payroll for the superior court judges, a deficit would occur in the operating account of the superior court judges, the Department of Administrative Services may request and pay a warrant

drawn on the account of the district attorney’s operating account to cover the needed funds in the operating account of the superior court judges for the final payroll of the fiscal year. 1971 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 71-117. Judge’s travel expenses. - There is no violation of limitations on the judge’s salary and allowances by receipt of travel expenses from state agency otherwise en-

titled to disburse such moneys. 1963-65 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 320. RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 46 Am. Jur. 2d, Judges, § 50 et seq.

C.J.S. - 48A C.J.S., Judges, § 84 et seq.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2019–2019 · leading case: Cowen v. Clayton Cnty., 306 Ga. 698 (Ga. 2019).
Cowen v. Clayton Cnty., 306 Ga. 698 (Ga. 2019). · cites it 2× “2017 Compensation 6 To the extent that Cowen argues that she was somehow entitled to an additional direct supplement to her income based on the provisions of OCGA § 15-6-29.1 (a), she is, once again, mistaken.”
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.