Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the issues covered in the provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, §§ 34-2801, 34-2802, 34-2803, 34-3001 and Code Section 21-3-424 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Who was proper presiding judge.

- Under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-523, a superior court judge or a senior superior court judge had to be selected to preside over the dismissal of the election contest action. Williams v. Heard, 302 Ga. 114, 805 S.E.2d 1 (2017).

Protest filed prior to declaration of results.

- Although technically incorrect, a protest may be lodged prior to the governing authority's declaring the results of the election where such a handling affords the parties substantial justice. Garnto v. Wheeler, 235 Ga. 405, 219 S.E.2d 721 (1975).

Time limit for filing petition.

- The requirement that a petition to contest shall be filed within five days after the results of the election are certified by the election official means in effect "not later than" that date. Whittington v. Mathis, 253 Ga. 653, 324 S.E.2d 727 (1985).

Failure to comply with five-day limit.

- Where the contestants failed to comply with the five-day limit, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to decide the merits of the contest. Mayor & Council v. Hall, 261 Ga. 681, 410 S.E.2d 105 (1991).

Agent of court fails to follow procedure.

- The right to contest the results of an election through the expedited procedure of former subsection (c) of O.C.G.A. § 21-3-424 is not waived by the clerk of court's failure to follow the procedure outlined in former subsection (f). Stuckey v. Storms, 265 Ga. 491, 458 S.E.2d 344 (1995) (decided under former § 21-3-424).

Holding of election is generally a political matter not ordinarily cognizable in a court of equity. Committee for New Cobb County Revenue v. Brown, 228 Ga. 364, 185 S.E.2d 534 (1971).

Jurisdiction of an ordinary (now superintendent) to determine contest arising out of election of constable is limited, and the ordinary has no power other than that expressly conferred by statute, and in such a proceeding the ordinary does not act in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity; consequently the ordinary's sole authority and jurisdiction is to determine whether the person filing the contest or the one who was declared elected received the greater number of legal votes, and, in case the contestant received it, to declare the contestant duly elected. Thompson v. Stone, 205 Ga. 243, 53 S.E.2d 458 (1949) (decided under former Code 1933, §§ 34-2801, 34-2802, 34-2803, 34-3001).

Cited in Bell v. Southwell, 376 F.2d 659 (5th Cir. 1967); Hollifield v. Vickers, 118 Ga. App. 229, 162 S.E.2d 905 (1968); Ollila v. Graham, 126 Ga. App. 288, 190 S.E.2d 542 (1972); Dolvin v. Town of Siloam, 246 Ga. 131, 269 S.E.2d 23 (1980); Littlejohn v. Cleland, 251 Ga. 597, 308 S.E.2d 186 (1983); Streeter v. Paschal, 267 Ga. 207, 476 S.E.2d 759 (1996).

Jurisdiction over challenge of one holding office of sheriff.

- Jurisdiction to hear a case seeking to challenge the qualifications of a person to hold the office of sheriff rests with the superior courts. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U80-1.

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 26 Am. Jur. 2d, Elections, § 396 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 29 C.J.S., Elections, § 419 et seq.