Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Ga. L. 1970, p. 542, § 1, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Constitutionality.

- Statute did not violate Ga. Const. 1945, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III). Butts County v. Briscoe, 236 Ga. 233, 223 S.E.2d 199 (1976) (decided under Ga. L. 1970, p. 542, § 1).

Statute did not destroy uniformity as between taxpayers of a county. Chilivis v. Kell, 236 Ga. 226, 223 S.E.2d 117, cert. denied, 429 U.S. 891, 97 S. Ct. 249, 50 L. Ed. 2d 174 (1976) (decided under Ga. L. 1970, p. 542, § 1).

C.J.S.

- 78A C.J.S., Schools and School Districts, § 845 et seq. 81A C.J.S., States, § 142. 84 C.J.S., Taxation, § 700 et seq.

County governing authority has no implied authority to perform acts of assessors.

- Former Code 1933, Ch. 92-69 (see now O.C.G.A. Pt. 2, Art. 5, Ch. 5, T. 48) conferring authority upon assessors to perform specific acts negatives any implied power of the county commissioners (now county governing authority) to perform the same acts. Bagwell v. Cash, 207 Ga. 222, 60 S.E.2d 628 (1950).

Assessors cannot obligate county to pay another for services the assessors are required to perform.

- County tax assessors cannot, with the approval of county commissioners (now county governing authority), obligate the county to pay another with county funds for performing services which the assessors are required to perform and for which the assessors draw pay from the county. Bagwell v. Cash, 207 Ga. 222, 60 S.E.2d 628 (1950).

Increases for sole purpose of raising revenue, not for fixing fair values, are unconstitutional.

- When county tax assessors, without investigation, make a systematic and comprehensive increase in the value of all property returned in the county for taxes for a particular year, not for the purpose of fixing just and fair values after investigation, or for the purpose of equalizing taxes, but for the sole purpose of raising additional revenue, such assessments are null and void as the assessments are clearly violative of Ga. Const. 1945, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III) and Ga. Const. 1945, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. II (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Para. II) and U.S. Const., amend. 14. Hutchins v. Howard, 211 Ga. 830, 89 S.E.2d 183 (1955).

Suits by board employees against county for compensation are unauthorized.

- Even were it to be assumed that the employment of a copyist to be compensated by the county would be authorized, there is nothing in the Act at variance with the prohibition against suits against a county save when expressly authorized by statute or by the provision of the state Constitution. Accordingly, even though it be assumed that the claim against the county is a just one, a suit by such an employee against the county for the recovery of such compensation is unauthorized. Decatur County v. Townsend, 46 Ga. App. 103, 166 S.E. 774 (1932).