Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The nomination of any person who is declared nominated at a primary as a candidate for any federal, state, county, or municipal office; the election of any person who is declared elected to any such office (except when otherwise prescribed by the federal Constitution or the Constitution of Georgia); the eligibility of any person declared eligible to seek any such nomination or office in a run-off primary or election; or the approval or disapproval of any question submitted to electors at an election may be contested by any person who was a candidate at such primary or election for such nomination or office, or by any aggrieved elector who was entitled to vote for such person or for or against such question.
(Code 1933, § 34-1702, enacted by Ga. L. 1964, Ex. Sess., p. 26, § 1; Ga. L. 1968, p. 871, § 17; Ga. L. 1998, p. 295, § 1.)
- For survey article on local government law, see 34 Mercer L. Rev. 225 (1982). For article, "The Civil Jurisdiction of State and Magistrate Courts," see 24 Ga. St. B.J. 29 (1987).
- In light of similarity of the issues covered in the provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 34A-1501 and Code Section 21-3-421 are included in the annotations for this Code section.
This section related merely to procedural matters of appeal and not to the substantive right to a jury trial once the appeal has been perfected. Bell v. Cronic, 248 Ga. 457, 283 S.E.2d 476 (1981) (decided under former Code 1933, § 34A-1501).
- Filing an independent suit, rather than a notice of appeal, in the lower tribunal was sufficient to vest the superior court with jurisdiction to decide the appeal from the adverse decision of the mayor and city council, and the superior court was bound to make the determination whether the procedural irregularity caused unreasonable or inexcusable delay. Hanson v. Wilson, 257 Ga. 5, 354 S.E.2d 126 (1987).
- Former Code 1933, § 34-203 (d) (see O.C.G.A. § 21-2-32(g)), requiring a copy of the proceeding in any action contesting an election or primary, except those instituted by the state election board, to be served on the board by mailing the copy to the chairman by certified or registered mail, is made applicable to municipal elections by the provisions contained in former Code 1933, § 34A-110 (formerly § 21-3-7). Collins v. Williams, 237 Ga. 576, 229 S.E.2d 388 (1976); Lyde v. City of Brunswick, 241 Ga. 554, 246 S.E.2d 673 (1978).
- The failure of a contestant to meet the statutory requirement of filing an appeal to the superior court within 10 days from the town's rejection of the contestant's protest requires dismissal of the appeal. Nevels v. City of Sale City, 128 Ga. App. 57, 195 S.E.2d 657 (1973).
- Where the election is between or among candidates for a public office, it is only one or more of those candidates that have standing to file a petition to contest the results of the election. A mere citizen-voter who was not a candidate in the election does not have standing. Campbell v. Carroll, 233 Ga. 87, 209 S.E.2d 624 (1974).
This section only provides a means for contesting the result of a completed election. Committee for New Cobb County Revenue v. Brown, 228 Ga. 364, 185 S.E.2d 534 (1971) (see O.C.G.A. § 21-2-521).
- A person who has felony convictions for burglary and receiving stolen goods is not eligible to vote and is thus not an "aggrieved elector" able to contest an election. Mathews v. Gibbs, 238 Ga. 680, 235 S.E.2d 3 (1977).
- Where plaintiffs filed a mandamus action to force the probate judge to properly verify the signatures on a recall petition and notwithstanding a reference to O.C.G.A. § 21-2-521 regarding the contesting of results of primaries or elections and the inclusion of prayers for equitable relief, the complaint stated a claim under O.C.G.A. § 21-4-17, and its dismissal was error. Howell v. Tidwell, 256 Ga. 647, 352 S.E.2d 372 (1987).
Election challenger's timely filed election contest, filed after the election, was erroneously dismissed, as such was not moot merely because the challenger failed to file the contest prior to the election, given that no statutory provision or case law supported this proposition, and the petition sufficiently stated a claim upon which relief could be granted. Allen v. Yost, 281 Ga. 102, 636 S.E.2d 517 (2006), appeal dismissed, 282 Ga. 865, 655 S.E.2d 580 (2008).
Cited in Richmond County Bus. Ass'n v. Richmond County, 223 Ga. 337, 155 S.E.2d 395 (1967); Bell v. Southwell, 376 F.2d 659 (5th Cir. 1967); Hollifield v. Vickers, 118 Ga. App. 229, 162 S.E.2d 905 (1968); Hill v. Brown, 227 Ga. 549, 181 S.E.2d 840 (1971); Johnson v. Rheney, 245 Ga. 316, 264 S.E.2d 872 (1980); Moore v. Burden, 245 Ga. 567, 266 S.E.2d 181 (1980); Highsmith v. Clark, 245 Ga. 158, 264 S.E.2d 1 (1980); Dolvin v. Town of Siloam, 246 Ga. 131, 269 S.E.2d 23 (1980); Jackson v. Dingle, 160 Ga. App. 773, 287 S.E.2d 110 (1982); Geron v. Calibre Cos., 250 Ga. 213, 296 S.E.2d 602 (1982).
- 26 Am. Jur. 2d, Elections, § 404 et seq.
- 29 C.J.S., Elections, §§ 416, 435 et seq.
- Effect of irregularities or defects in primary petitions - State cases, 14 A.L.R.6th 543.
Total Results: 13 | Sort by: Relevance | Newest First