DeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany

Decision Date03 December 1942
Docket Number14363
CitationDeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany, 195 Ga. 189, 23 S.E.2d 716 (Ga. 1942)
PartiesDeJARNETTE et al. v. HOSPITAL AUTHORITY OF ALBANY et al.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1942. [Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Syllabus by the Court.

1. The act approved March 27, 1941, Ga.L.1941, p. 241, known as the hospital authorities law, and the contract based thereon are not void as violative of the equal protection clause of the constitution of this State, art. 1, sec. 1, par. 2 (Code § 2-102, on the grounds, as contended, that (a) the said act and contract subjects intervenors' property to taxation for rendering medical aid to indigent sick, a special class of persons, whereas intervenors must pay to obtain services, and that (b) while the act sets up a hospital authority to perform a purported governmental function, and to which it is proposed the powers therein named shall be delegated, this is not such a governmental function as counties, cities, or other political subdivisions are allowed by law to undertake.

2. Section 3 of said act does not delegate to the counties and cities of this State certain powers which are nondelegable legislative powers, in violation of the constitution, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1 (Code, § 2-1201), which declares: 'The legislative power of the State shall be vested in a General Assembly which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.'

3. The said act, and particularly sections 7, 8, 9, and 12, are not void as violative of the constitution, art. 1, sec. 1, par. 23 (Code,§ 2-123), dealing with the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive powers.

4. Said act is not violative of the constitution, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 1 (Code, § 2-401), declaring that no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law.

5. When the constitutional amendment was adopted, Ga.L.1941, p. 50, and the hospital authorities law was enacted, that law became a part of the charter of every municipal corporation of the State that created a hospital authority under such law.

6. The act approved March 27, 1941, Ga.L.1941, p. 50, amending art. 7, sec. 6, par. 3, of the constitution (Code Ann. § 2-5403), in enacting and providing for submission of the constitutional amendment to the vote of the people, is not violative of the constitution, art. 3, sec. 7, par. 8, (Code, § 2-1808), which declares that 'No law or ordinance shall pass which refers to more than one subject-matter, or contains matter different from what is expressed in the title thereof.'

7. The constitutional amendment of 1941, 'authorizing counties and municipal corporations to contract with each other or with public agencies, public corporations or authorities, and to convey existing facilities to any public agencies, public corporations or authorities, and to provide hospitalization facilities,' did not relax or affect the existing constitutional provisions and limitations as to the incurring of debts by political subdivisions, as contained in the Code, § 2-5501, Const. art. 7, § 7, par. 1.

(a) The hospital authorities act, Ga.L.1941, p. 241, does not violate such existing-debt clause of the constitution.

(b) In this case, however, the contract between the county and the city on the one hand, and the hospital authority on the other, does violate such debt clause to the extent that it promises (1) to pay money in future years, and (2) to levy in future years a tax sufficient to pay the same, without the assent of two thirds of the qualified voters, as required by that clause.

(c) The contract also violates the provision of the act which declares that 'sums due and payable under such contract shall be determined from year to year during the period of such contract,' and authorizes annual levy of taxes not exceeding five mills for the payment of such sums.

8. For reasons just indicated, the court erred in validating and confirming the revenue-anticipation certificates, as proposed.

This is a proceeding to validate and confirm the issuance of certain revenue anticipation certificates in conformity with article 7, section 6, paragraph 3, of the Georgia constitution (Code, § 2-5403, Ann.Supp.), and an act of the General Assembly known as the 'hospital authorities laws', Ga.L.1941, p. 241. By an act approved March 27, 1941, p. 50, the legislature proposed an amendment to the constitution, art. 7, sec. 6, as amended, which authorized counties and municipal corporations to contract with each other or with public agencies, public corporations or authorities, and to convey existing facilities to any public agencies, public corporation or authorities, and to provide hospitalization facilities, the proposed amendment being as follows:

'Section 1. That Article Seven, Section Six, of the Constitution of Georgia, as heretofore amended, be further amended by adding at the end of said Section Six the following new paragraph to be designated as Paragraph Three, to-wit:

'Paragraph 3. (a) Any city, town, municipality, or county of this State may contract for any period not exceeding thirty years with each other or with any public agency, public corporation or authority now or hereafter created for the use by such subdivisions or the residents thereof of any facilities or services of any such city, town, municipality, county, public agency, public corporation or authority, provided such contracts shall deal with such activities and transactions as such subdivisions are by law authorized to undertake.

'(b) Any city, town, municipality, or county of this State is empowered, in connection with any contracts authorized by the preceding paragraph, to convey to any public agency, public corporation or authority now or hereafter created existing facilities operated by such city, town, municipality or county for the benefit of residents of such subdivisions, provided the land, buildings, and equipment so conveyed shall not be mortgaged or pledged to secure obligations of any such public agency, public corporation or authority and provided such facilities are to be maintained and operated by such public agency, public corporation or authority for the same purposes for which such facilities were operated by such city, town, municipality or county. Nothing in this section shall restrict the pledging of revenues of such facilities by any public agency, public corporation or authority.

'(c) Any city, town, municipality or county of this State, or any combination of the same may contract with any public agency, public corporation or authority for the care, maintenance and hospitalization of its indigent sick, and may as a part of such contract obligate itself to pay for the cost of acquisition, construction, modernization or repairs of necessary buildings and facilities by such public agency, public corporation or authority, and provide for the payment of such services and the cost to such public agency, public corporation or authority of acquisition, construction, modernization or repair of buildings and facilities from revenues realized by such city, town, municipality or county from any taxes authorized by the Constitution of this State or revenues derived from any other sources.' This proposed amendment was ratified at the June, 1941, general election.

The legislature, at the same session and on the same day the constitutional amendment was proposed, passed an act referred to as the 'hospital authorities law.' Ga.L.1941, p 241. The title of this act was: 'An Act to create public bodies corporate and politic to be known as Hospital Authorities; to define and provide for the exercise of the duties and powers of such Authorities; to authorize the construction by such Authorities of hospitals, sanitariums, clinics, and other public buildings in connection with hospital projects and utilities in connection with or incident to hospital projects and facilities; to provide for the issuance, sale and redemption of revenue anticipation certificates; to provide funds for such construction; to provide that such obligations shall not constitute obligations of any county or municipal corporation; to authorize counties and municipal corporations to levy taxes; to provide medical or other care and hospitalization for the indigent sick of such subdivisions, and to contract therefor with such hospital Authority; to authorize counties and municipal corporations to convey to such Authorities existing hospital facilities; to provide that the properties held by such Hospital Authorities and securities issued by such authorities shall be exempt from taxation and shall constitute legal investments for trustees; to provide for the exercise of the right of eminent domain by such Authorities; and for other purposes.' By this act it was sought to create in each county and municipal corporation of the State a public body corporate to be known as 'The Hospital Authority' of such county or municipal corporation. The act further provided that such authority 'shall be deemed to exercise public and essential governmental functions.' Any authority created under this act was given the power to acquire, lease, and operate a hospital project, to construct, or improve, or alter such project, to establish rates and charges for the use of the service, to maintain and operate the project, and to issue and sell negotiable revenue-anticipation certificates, to pay for either the cost of acquisition, or construction, or both. Such county or municipal corporation was therein authorized to levy an ad valorem tax not exceeding five mills, exclusive of other taxes which may be levied by counties and cities, to pay annually sums sufficient to pay for the cost of the use of such services and facilities in providing medical care or hospitalization for the indigent sick...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
26 cases
  • Olevik v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • October 16, 2017
    ...Clarke v. Johnson, 199 Ga. 163, 166, 33 S.E.2d 425 (1945) (citation and punctuation omitted); see also DeJarnette v. Hosp. Auth. of Albany, 195 Ga. 189, 205 (7), 23 S.E.2d 716 (1942) (the meaning and effect of constitutional amendments "is to be determined in connection, not only with the c......
  • Savage v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • June 29, 2015
    ...at 867, 388 S.E.2d 671.Savage alone argues that we should ignore all of this precedent and instead follow DeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany, 195 Ga. 189, 23 S.E.2d 716 (1942), which held that intergovernmental contracts were subject to the requirements of the debt limitation clause......
  • Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • February 19, 2013
    ...which could carry out and make more workable the duty which the State owed to its indigent sick." DeJarnette v. Hospital Auth. of Albany, 195 Ga. 189, 200, 23 S.E.2d 716, 723 (1942) (citations omitted). As amended, the Law authorizes each county and municipality, and certain combinations of......
  • City of Valdosta v. Singleton
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1944
    ... ... were as to authority of the mayor and council to do the ... things proposed, the mere fact ... DeJarnette v. HospitalAuthority [197 Ga. 211] of ... Albany, 195 Ga. 189(7), 402, ... ...
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Local Government Law
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 68-1, September 2016
    • Invalid date
    ...CONST. art. IX, § 5, para. 1(a).184. Id. 185. Savage, 297 Ga. at 639, 774 S.E.2d at 635.186. Id.187. Id. at 639-40, 774 S.E.2d at 635.188. 195 Ga. 189, 23 S.E.2d 716 (1942).189. Savage, 297 Ga. at 639, 774 S.E.2d at 635.190. Id. at 642, 774 S.E.2d at 637.191. GA. CONST. art. III, § 6, para.......