Bell v. Cronic, 37673
| Decision Date | 28 October 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 37673,37673 |
| Citation | 283 S.E.2d 476,248 Ga. 457 |
| Parties | BELL v. CRONIC. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Gregory M. Perry, Commerce, Jack S. Davidson, Jefferson, for Hoyt bell.
T. David Motes, J. H. Wood, Jefferson, for Jimmy Cronic.
On November 4, 1980, an election was held in Hoschton, Georgia, to elect a mayor of the City of Hoschton. Hoyt Bell, the incumbent, received 113 of the 228 votes cast, Jimmy Cronic, the contestant in this case, received 110 votes; 5 votes were unintelligible as marked.
Mr. Cronic, pursuant to the provisions of the Georgia Municipal Election Code, Code Ann. § 34A-1501, filed a timely contest with the governing authority of the City of Hoschton. After a hearing by the City Council, the results of the election as declared by the managers were validated by that governing authority. A timely appeal to the Superior Court of Jackson County, as required by Code Ann. § 34A-1501(b), was filed by the contestant.
Respondent Bell demanded a jury trial, but the court denied this demand. The trial was then had before the court, and at the conclusion of the trial, the court entered the following judgment: (1) that the election for the office of Mayor of the City of Hoschton held on November 4th, 1980, was so defective as to be invalid; (2) and for this reason, another election was to be held on March 11, 1981.
Mayor Bell appealed the superior court's decision to the Court of Appeals, which properly transferred the case to this court.
1. The first enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in denying the appellant's demand for a trial by jury, which the appellant claims he is entitled to under Code Ann. §§ 34A-1501(b) and 6-601.
The rule in Georgia on the right to a trial by jury is clear. In construing the provision of the Georgia Constitution which states that the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, this court has consistently held that in civil actions the right of a jury trial exists only in those cases where the right existed prior to the first Georgia Constitution, and the Constitution guarantees the continuance of this right unchanged as it existed at common law. Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Huhn, 165 Ga. 667, 142 S.E. 121 (1927). The court in Huhn also stated that contested election cases are among those where a right to a jury trial did not exist prior to the first Constitution. Therefore, the right can only exist by statute.
The policy behind this rule was articulated by this court in Freeman v. McDonald, 72 Ga. 812, 814 (1884): "In a government where the officers are elective, it is absolutely necessary that there should be some quick and summary way to determine [election] contests ...; public policy requires that the machinery of the government shall be put in operation, and this might be delayed for a long or indefinite time, if left to be determined by a jury ..."
The applicable provision of the Municipal Election Code is Code Ann. § 34A-1501(b): (Emphases supplied.)
The appellant's argument that there is a right to a jury trial in appeals to superior court under § 34A-1501(b) of the Municipal Election Code is based on the fact that: (1) there is a right to a jury trial in appeals from probate court to superior court under § 6-601, and (2) § 34A-1501(b) states that the decision of the governing authority may be appealed to the superior court "in the manner of" appeal from a probate court.
The trial judge rejected this argument, ruling that the previously-quoted language from § 34A-1501(b) relates merely to procedural matters of appeal and not to the substantive right to a jury trial once the appeal has been perfected. The trial judge based this conclusion on other portions of § 34A-1501(b) providing that the judge shall preside over the proceedings and determine same. And, as previously noted, there is no constitutional right to a jury trial in an election contest proceeding.
We agree with the ruling of the trial judge and the reasons given in support thereof. Accordingly, we hold that the trial judge did not err in denying the appellant's demand for a jury trial.
2. The appellant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martin v. Fulton Cnty. Bd. of Registration & Elections
...v. Deverger , 282 Ga. 566, 651 S.E.2d 671 (2007) ; Whittington v. Mathis , 253 Ga. 653, 324 S.E.2d 727 (1985) ; and Bell v. Cronic , 248 Ga. 457, 283 S.E.2d 476 (1981) ). Within that context, the party contesting an election generally must "show a specific number of illegal or irregular bal......
-
Manderson & Associates, Inc. v. Gore
...equipment. This finding of fact is adequately supported by the trial record and will not be disturbed. OCGA § 9-11-52(a); Bell v. Cronic, 248 Ga. 457(2), 283 S.E.2d 476; Moore v. Lovelace, supra at Evidence of record reflects that MGH owned approximately 50 billboards of three different typ......
-
Department of Transp. v. Del-Cook Timber Co., Inc.
...as it existed at common law. Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Huhn, 165 Ga. 667, 142 S.E. 121 (1927)." Bell v. Cronic, 248 Ga. 457(1), 283 S.E.2d 476 (1981). As held in Huhn, supra, the right of jury trial does not apply to special proceedings not known at the time of adoption of ......
-
Meade v. Williamson, S13A0517.
...Elections v. Deverger, 282 Ga. 566, 651 S.E.2d 671 (2007); Whittington v. Mathis, 253 Ga. 653, 324 S.E.2d 727 (1985); Bell v. Cronic, 248 Ga. 457, 283 S.E.2d 476 (1981). 4. Spalding testified he had been given $20 for his vote. Dawson testified she was paid money and given liquor by a Meade......
-
Medical Malpractice as Workers' Comp: Overcoming State Constitutional Barriers to Tort Reform
...See supra text accompanying note 27.139. See Ga. Code Ann. § 34-9-7 (West 2017).140. Huhn, 142 S.E. at 123.141. See Bell v. Cronic, 283 S.E.2d 476, 477 (Ga. 1981); Strange v. Strange, 148 S.E.2d 494 (Ga. 1966). 142. Dep't of Transp. v. Del-Cook Timber Co., 285 S.E.2d 913, 919 (Ga. 1982).143......