Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 9-6-1 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 9-6-1 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 9-6-1

TITLE 9 CIVIL PRACTICE

Section 6. Extraordinary Writs, 9-6-1 through 9-6-66.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

9-6-1. Final judgment prerequisite to appeal; grant of new trial subject to review.

No appeal as to any ruling or decision in a mandamus or quo warranto proceeding or in a case involving a writ of prohibition may be taken until there has been a final judgment in the trial court. The grant of a new trial shall be treated as a final judgment in these cases and subject to review as in other cases.

(Ga. L. 1882-83, p. 103, § 3; Civil Code 1895, § 4874; Civil Code 1910, § 5447; Code 1933, § 64-110; Ga. L. 1946, p. 726, § 1; Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 3-4/HB 927.)

The 2016 amendment, effective January 1, 2017, deleted "to the Supreme Court" following "may be taken" in the middle of the first sentence. See Editor's notes for applicability.

Editor's notes.

- Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 1-1/HB 927, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Appellate Jurisdiction Reform Act of 2016.'"

Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 6-1/HB 927, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that: "Part III of this Act shall become effective on January 1, 2017, and shall apply to cases in which a notice of appeal or application to appeal is filed on or after such date."

Law reviews.

- For article on the 2016 amendment of this Code section, see 33 Georgia St. U.L. Rev. 205 (2016).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

This section does not affect right to file and prosecute motion for new trial in a mandamus case, and does not limit the time within which such a motion must be disposed of. City of Macon v. Herrington, 198 Ga. 576, 32 S.E.2d 517 (1944) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-6-1).

Final judgment on prayer for mandamus prerequisite to appeal.

- Order overruling demurrers (now motions to dismiss), to petition for mandamus and for injunctive relief cannot be reviewed by Supreme Court until there has been a final judgment on the prayer for a mandamus absolute. Walker v. McKenzie, 209 Ga. 653, 74 S.E.2d 870, later appeal, 210 Ga. 189, 78 S.E.2d 486 (1953).

Direct appeal of denial of application in nature of quo warranto.

- The law authorizes a direct appeal to a judgment denying an application to file an information in the nature of a quo warranto. Walker v. Hamilton, 209 Ga. 735, 76 S.E.2d 12 (1953).

Cited in City of Dalton v. Smith, 158 Ga. App. 356, 280 S.E.2d 138 (1981).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

17 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Mandamus, § 136. 18B Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, New Trial, § 1.

ALR.

- Consideration of obligor's personal-injury recovery or settlement in fixing alimony or child support, 59 A.L.R.5th 489.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 9-6-1

Total Results: 10  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Garza v. State, 670 S.E.2d 73 (Ga. 2008).

Cited 192 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 3, 2008 | 284 Ga. 696, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 3470

Copy

Nathans v. Diamond, 654 S.E.2d 121 (Ga. 2007).

Cited 80 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 21, 2007 | 282 Ga. 804, 2007 Fulton County D. Rep. 3609

Copy

Albany Urology Clinic, P.C. v. Cleveland, 528 S.E.2d 777 (Ga. 2000).

Cited 53 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 6, 2000 | 272 Ga. 296, 2000 Fulton County D. Rep. 945

Copy

Arnold v. Alexander, 914 S.E.2d 311 (Ga. 2025).

Cited 30 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 18, 2025 | 321 Ga. 330

...(“the Act”), Ga. L. 2016, p. 884, § 1-1, this Court had appellate jurisdiction over cases involving extraordinary remedies, which include writs of mandamus, prohibition, and quo warranto. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III; OCGA § 9-6-1 et seq....
Copy

Alexander v. Alexander, 610 S.E.2d 48 (Ga. 2005).

Cited 22 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 7, 2005 | 279 Ga. 116, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 660

...NOTES [1] This was later found by a jury to be a fraudulent conveyance. [2] He also argues that the knowledge Ms. Alexander had of his assets was sufficiently precise to uphold the agreement. [3] Tidwell v. Critz, 248 Ga. 201, 203 282 S.E.2d 104 (1981). [4] See OCGA § 9-6-1 et seq.
Copy

Bryan Cnty. v. Yates Paving & Grading Co., 638 S.E.2d 302 (Ga. 2006).

Cited 18 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 30, 2006 | 281 Ga. 361, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 3702

Copy

Blotner v. Doreika, 678 S.E.2d 80 (Ga. 2009).

Cited 17 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 8, 2009 | 285 Ga. 481, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 1918

Copy

Willis v. Willis, 707 S.E.2d 344 (Ga. 2011).

Cited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 24, 2011 | 288 Ga. 577

...ith Husband having final decision-making authority on childcare and education. Wife also maintains that the trial court and members of the court's staff acted improperly while the case was pending in the trial court, to Wife's detriment. 1. OCGA § 19-6-15(b) sets out the process for calculating child support....
...The trial court followed the statutory procedure, finding Wife's pro rata share of the parties' combined income to be 35.9% and Husband's to be 64.10%, which equated to pro rata basic child support obligations of $368.69 and $658.31, respectively. See OCGA § 19-6-15(b)(1-5)....
...for Husband. After making the adjustment for the payment of the additional expenses, the trial court determined the presumptive amount of child support for Wife to be $66.04 and $960.96 for Husband, with none of the deviations allowed under OCGA § 19-6-15(b)(8) being applicable. See OCGA § 19-5-16(b)(6)(8). Husband contends the trial court abused its discretion in failing to make a deviation for parenting time based upon the award of joint physical and legal custody made by the trial court. See OCGA § 19-6-15(i)(2)(K)(i)....
...lication of the presumptive amount of child support would be unjust or inappropriate and that the best interest of the child for whom support is being determined will be served by deviation from the presumptive amount of child support." See OCGA § 19-6-15(c)(2)(E)(iii)....
Copy

Cardio TVP Surgical Assocs., P.C. v. Gillis, 528 S.E.2d 785 (Ga. 2000).

Cited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 1, 2000 | 272 Ga. 404, 2000 Fulton County D. Rep. 1618

Copy

Doctors Hosp. of Augusta v. Alicea, Admrx., 299 Ga. 315 (Ga. 2016).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jul 5, 2016 | 788 S.E.2d 392