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: 904-383-7448A private person may by mandamus enforce the performance by a corporation of a public duty as to matters in which he has a special interest.
(Civil Code 1895, § 4869; Civil Code 1910, § 5442; Code 1933, § 64-103.)
- The language of this Code section is derived in part from the decision in Savannah & Ogeechee Canal Co. v. Shuman, 91 Ga. 400, 17 S.E. 937 (1893).
This section applies only in cases where there is "a public duty" involved. Bregman v. Orkin Exterminating Co., 213 Ga. 561, 100 S.E.2d 267 (1957) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-6-23).
Mandamus is not remedy to enforce purely private right of stockholder against corporation when the right sought to be enforced is in no way affected with a public interest. Bregman v. Orkin Exterminating Co., 213 Ga. 561, 100 S.E.2d 267 (1957).
Citizen engaged in lumber business could compel canal company to keep its canal in navigable condition, where special damage accrued to the former because of a violation of this duty. Savannah & Ogeechee Canal Co. v. Shuman, 91 Ga. 400, 17 S.E. 937 (1893).
Private party may, by mandamus, enforce performance of public duty by common carrier as to matters in which such party has a special interest. Beck & Gregg Hdwe. Co. v. Associated Transp., Inc., 210 Ga. 545, 81 S.E.2d 515 (1954).
The defendant, a common carrier, having accepted merchandise consigned to the plaintiff, it was the defendant's duty to deliver it to the plaintiff and, on refusal to do so, mandamus will lie to require a performance of the duty. Beck & Gregg Hdwe. Co. v. Associated Transp., Inc., 210 Ga. 545, 81 S.E.2d 515 (1954).
- If a railroad company takes out and discontinues an existing street crossing which it has maintained over its railroad, such conduct and action is equivalent to refusal to perform the public duty of maintaining such crossing; and, where mandamus proceedings are instituted to require the railroad company to restore and maintain the crossing in good condition, it is not prerequisite to allege a demand for performance of the duty. Atlantic Coast Line R.R. v. Donalsonville Grain & Elevator Co., 184 Ga. 291, 191 S.E. 87 (1937).
- Mandamus will not be granted to compel municipal authorities to levy and collect a tax to pay a judgment alleged to be held by the applicants against the municipality, where it appears that the judgment relied on is not a valid judgment against it. Meyer & Co. v. Jordan, 123 Ga. 669, 51 S.E. 602 (1905).
- Trial court erred by granting a nominee's writ of mandamus because under O.C.G.A. § 9-6-23, mandamus did not lie to enforce purely private contract rights and the nominee's efforts to be qualified as a person to sit on the board of an electric membership corporation was a private right as board members were not public officers within the meaning of O.C.G.A. § 9-6-20. Rigby v. Boatright, 294 Ga. 253, 751 S.E.2d 851 (2013).
- Mere fact that a court order is mandatory, rather than prohibitive, does not transform injunctive relief into a writ of mandamus, and an injunction is not void merely because it is mandatory in nature. Moreover, a trial court may issue a mandatory injunction when mandamus relief is not available. Rigby v. Boatright, 330 Ga. App. 181, 767 S.E.2d 783 (2014).
Cited in Terrell v. Georgia R.R. & Banking, 115 Ga. 104, 41 S.E. 262 (1902); Southern Express Co. v. Rose Co., 124 Ga. 581, 53 S.E. 185 (1906); Sylvania & G.R.R. v. Hoge, 129 Ga. 734, 59 S.E. 806 (1907); Central of Ga. Ry. v. Dixon, 141 Ga. 755, 82 S.E. 37 (1914); Scott v. Flint River Pecan Co., 159 Ga. 668, 126 S.E. 769 (1925); Dodge, Inc. v. West View Cem. Ass'n, 173 Ga. 67, 159 S.E. 865 (1931); Carroll v. American Agric. Chem. Co., 175 Ga. 855, 167 S.E. 597 (1932); Claxton State Bank v. R.S. Armstrong & Bro. Co., 185 Ga. 487, 195 S.E. 418 (1938).
- 52 Am. Jur. 2d, Mandamus, § 43.
- 55 C.J.S., Mandamus, § 228 et seq.
Total Results: 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2013-11-25
Citation: 294 Ga. 253, 751 S.E.2d 851, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 3668, 2013 WL 6188151, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 996
Snippet: public.”). Boatright also contends that OCGA § 9-6-23 provides for the remedy of a writ of mandamus in
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2000-01-31
Citation: 526 S.E.2d 851, 272 Ga. 38, 2000 Fulton County D. Rep. 418, 2000 Ga. LEXIS 77
Snippet: individual must have a “special interest” (OCGA § 9-6-23); to use mandamus to enforce a private right, one