Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448(Code 1933, § 34-1707, enacted by Ga. L. 1964, Ex. Sess., p. 26, § 1; Ga. L. 1998, p. 295, § 1.)
- Trial court properly denied two challengers' petition contesting a city's general election as the challengers failed to show fraud, misconduct, irregularity or illegality; a new election manager was not required for each election; a jury trial was not warranted in the matter; and there was no basis shown to set aside the results of the runoff election. Fuller v. Thomas, 284 Ga. 397, 667 S.E.2d 587 (2008).
Cited in Henderson v. County Bd. of Registration & Elections, 126 Ga. App. 280, 190 S.E.2d 633 (1972).
- It is not the responsibility of a judge of the probate court, or a county board of elections, to determine the qualifications of a candidate in a general or special election, nor does the Georgia Election Code grant authority to either a judge of the probate court or a county board of elections to make a factual determination as to the eligibility of a potential candidate. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 76-90.
- 26 Am. Jur. 2d, Elections, § 431.
- 29 C.J.S., Elections, § 509 et seq.
Total Results: 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2010-09-20
Citation: 701 S.E.2d 134, 288 Ga. 26, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3012, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 614
Snippet: Fuller, supra, 284 Ga. at 399 (2). See OCGA § 21-2-526 (a). Judgment affirmed in part and appeal dismissed
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2008-10-06
Citation: 667 S.E.2d 587, 284 Ga. 397, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 3149, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 807
Snippet: put the results of the election in doubt. OCGA § 21-2-526(a); Henderson, supra at 285, 190 S.E.2d 633. The