O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-6-60 (2019)

For what purpose quo warranto may issue; who may bring action.

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The writ of quo warranto may issue to inquire into the right of any person to any public office the duties of which he is in fact discharging. It may be granted only after the application by some person either claiming the office or interested therein.

History

(Orig. Code 1863, § 3135; Code 1868, § 3147; Code 1873, § 3203; Code 1882, § 3203; Civil Code 1895, § 4878; Civil Code 1910, § 5451; Code 1933, § 64-201.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. Allen, 791 S.E.2d 800 (Ga. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. Allen, 791 S.E.2d 800 (Ga. 2016). · cites it 20× “In this regard, OCGA § 9-6-60 provides: The writ of quo warranto may issue to inquire into the right of any person to any public office the duties of which he is in fact discharging.”
Black Voters Matter Fund, Inc. v. Kemp, Governor (five Cases), 870 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. 2022). · cites it 4× “16 not transform Georgia Carry into a ‘person’ [entitled to bring an action for quo warranto] under OCGA § 9-6-60.”).13 We note that we asked the parties to provide supplemental briefing on the federal “diversion of resources theory” of standing, whether other states have…”
Scott K. Camp v. Ryan Christopher Williams, 879 S.E.2d 88 (Ga. 2022). · cites it 4× “399, 404-405 (2) (c) (761 SE2d 46) (2014) (citing OCGA § 9-6-60 (a “person” interested in a public office may seek a writ of quo warranto “to inquire into the right of any person to any public office”), and McCullers v.”
Jones v. Boone, 774 S.E.2d 668 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 6× “” Because it determined Mayor Lue did not possess the power to appoint Jones as city attorney, the trial court granted Boone’s petition for quo warranto. 1. Jones challenges the procedural posture of Boone’s petition for writ of quo warranto, arguing both that Boone did not have…”
Lue, Mayor v. Eady, 773 S.E.2d 679 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 2× “15 By analogy, the writ of quo warranto to challenge the right of a person to hold a specific public office, pursuant to OCGA § 9-6-60, is a proceeding against a named individual.”
Anderson v. Flake, 480 S.E.2d 10 (Ga. 1997). · cites it 2× “6 OCGA § 9-6-60 et seq.; see Walker, 209 Ga.”
Everetteze v. Clark, 685 S.E.2d 72 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 4× “Appellants appealed the trial court’s order to the Court of Appeals, which transferred the case to this Court.”
Clark v. Deal (& Vice Versa), 785 S.E.2d 524 (Ga. 2016). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 9-6-60. Clark argues that, without exception, Article VI, Section VII, Paragraph I requires all Court of Appeals judges to be elected in a nonpartisan election.”
Lilly v. Heard, 761 S.E.2d 46 (Ga. 2014). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 21-2-6 (b) (“any elector who is eligible to vote for any such candidate may challenge the qualifications of the candidate by filing a written *405 complaint with the [board of election] giving the reasons why the elector believes the candidate is not qualified to seek…”
Richardson v. Phillips, 677 S.E.2d 117 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× ““Quo warranto is an extraordinary remedy which exists solely by virtue of statute. [Cits.]” Anderson v.”
Marsh v. Clarke Cnty. Sch. Dist., 732 S.E.2d 443 (Ga. 2012). · cites it 2× “However, although mandamus is characterized as a legal remedy, it is more accurate to say that mandamus is a special kind of legal remedy, to wit, an extraordinary legal remedy like prohibition, OCGA § 9-6-40, or quo warranto, OCGA § 9-6-60. In fact, the writ of mandamus is much…”
Anderson v. Flake, 508 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 2× “An action seeking a writ of quo warranto filed pursuant to OCGA § 9-6-60 is one of the special statutory proceedings referenced in OCGA § 9-11-81.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.