Auditor's report akin to jury verdict.

- In most instances, an auditor's report is viewed in the same respect and effect as the verdict of a jury. Norair Eng'r Corp. v. Saint Joseph's Hosp., 147 Ga. App. 595, 249 S.E.2d 642 (1978).

Rulings on evidence are rulings of law and should be stated as such. Southern Pine Co. v. Dickey, 136 Ga. 662, 71 S.E. 1110 (1911).

Auditor's brief of the evidence may be concise and clear. Fowler v. Davis, 120 Ga. 442, 47 S.E. 951 (1904).

Alternative report may be filed. Hudson v. Hudson, 98 Ga. 147, 26 S.E. 482 (1896); Borders v. Vance, 134 Ga. 85, 67 S.E. 543 (1910).

Form of report.

- The auditor's findings of fact and of law should be separately classified: (1) to avoid undue influence on the jury; and (2) to aid the parties in formulating their exceptions to the auditor's report. Norair Eng'g Corp. v. Saint Joseph's Hosp., 163 Ga. App. 167, 290 S.E.2d 145 (1982).

Form of auditor's report can be dispensed with by agreement of the parties. King v. Steel Bldrs., Inc., 91 Ga. App. 203, 85 S.E.2d 466 (1954).

There is nothing in this section or chapter to provide that the form of an auditor's report which stated only factual conclusions, and contained no brief of evidence, agreed to by all parties and under the stipulations, is void and illegal. King v. Steel Bldrs., Inc., 91 Ga. App. 203, 85 S.E.2d 466 (1954) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-7-8).

It is not good objection to the approval of auditor's report that counsel was served with incorrect copy. Buttrill v. Buttrill, 179 Ga. 759, 177 S.E. 576 (1934).

Judge retains control of trial despite auditor's report.

- Although O.C.G.A. § 9-7-8 contemplates that the auditor's report shall be a complete disposition of all legal and factual issues which is final (subject to specified review), the superior court judge has inherent power to control the course of the trial, especially in equity cases. Carmichael v. Carmichael, 248 Ga. 216, 282 S.E.2d 71 (1981).

Rulings of neither auditor nor special master are immediately final. Sweat v. Georgia Power Co., 235 Ga. 281, 219 S.E.2d 384 (1975).

Rule of special master.

- Although the relationship and accountability of a special master to the court is that of an auditor, a special master is not obligated to render a report in the manner prescribed in this section containing the special master's findings and conclusions upon the law and the facts. Sweat v. Georgia Power Co., 235 Ga. 281, 219 S.E.2d 384 (1975) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-7-8).

Jury instructions.

- In the trial of a case which was submitted to an auditor, who made the auditor's findings of law and fact, to which exceptions were filed, it was not ground for new trial for the court to charge the jury the law as contained in this section which relate to the duties of an auditor; such charge was not confusing or misleading to the jury, nor erroneous for any reason assigned. Harrison v. Mayo, 169 Ga. 799, 151 S.E. 484 (1930) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-7-8).

Presenting auditor's report to the jury.

- Trial court did not err in refusing to present the noncompliant auditor's report to the jury because the report, which erroneously commingled the factual findings and legal conclusions, would impose a disadvantage and prejudice a camp in the camp's efforts to obtain a fair resolution of the camp's exceptions before a jury, and the parties stipulated to a procedure in which the case would be decided without recommitting the auditor's report for correction. Camp Cherokee, Inc. v. Marina Lane, LLC, 316 Ga. App. 366, 729 S.E.2d 510 (2012).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 27A Am. Jur. 2d, Equity, §§ 231-233.

C.J.S.

- 20 C.J.S., Counties, § 216 et seq.