Gay v. Crockett, 21347

• Decision Date: 05 October 1961
• Docket Number: No. 21347,21347
• Citation: 122 S.E.2d 241,217 Ga. 288
• Parties: Carlus D. GAY v. C. C. CROCKETT, Judge, et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 241

122 S.E.2d 241

217 Ga. 288

Carlus D. GAY v. C. C. CROCKETT, Judge, et al.

No. 21347.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Oct. 5, 1961.

Syllabus by the Court

The controversy which is the subject matter of the rule proceeding in the instant case in the City Court of Dublin, being also involved in a pending suit in the Superior Court of Laurens County, the defendant's plea in abatement showing this should have been sustained.

Carl K. Nelson, Nelson & Nelson, Dublin, for plaintiff in error.

Adams & McDonald, Dalton, Zack D. Cravey, Jr., Atlanta, H. Dale Thompson, Dublin, for defendants in error.

GRICE, Justice.

This is another suit in the litigation over costs, fines and forfeitures pertaining to the Sheriff of the City Court of Dublin. The controversy was previously here in Gay v. Laurens County, 213 Ga. 518, 100 S.E.2d 271 and Gay v. Lewis, 215 Ga. 317, 109 S.E.2d 646.

The case now before us arose when a rule was brought, on April 8, 1961, by the incumbent Judge of the City Court of Dublin against Carlus D. Gay, a former sheriff. The rule recited that Gay, as sheriff, had collected $73,549.25 in costs, fines and forfeitures from the June term, 1958, to December 31, 1960; that he was unlawfully withholding these funds from the Clerk of the City Court of Dublin, thereby preventing their distribution by the judge as provided by law. The rule also recited prior demand and the running of 20% interest therefrom, and ordered that the money be paid into court or cause be shown on May 1, 1961, why the former sheriff should not be dealt with as provided by law, under penalty of the rule being made absolute.

The respondent filed general and special demurrers making several attacks upon the rule, including the constitutionality of two amendments to the law under which the rule was brought (Ga.L.1900, p. 117, as amended by Ga.L.1941, p. 645 and Ga.L.1951, p. 3151). He also filed an answer denying that he was unlawfully withholding any public monies.

In addition, and of particular significance as we view the case, the respondent filed a plea in abatement.

This plea recited that the only persons or parties interested in the costs, fines and forfeitures of the City Court of Dublin were Laurens County, the Board of Commissioners of the Peace Officers' Annuity & Benefit Fund of Georgia, the Board of Commissioners of the Superior Court Clerks' Retirement Fund of Georgia, and the respondent; that at the time of the filing of this rule all of those persons or parties were, and still were, prosecuting an action involving said costs, fines and forfeiture funds in the Superior Court of Laurens County; and that said action was between the same parties. The plea alleged further that the superior court case was undisposed of, that the respondent had filed therein his answer and a cross-action asserting his claim against all costs, fines and forfeitures in the City Court of Dublin and all other courts of that county during his tenure of office and specifically against the same fund here involved, and praying for an equitable accounting as to all such funds.

The plea recited further '* * * that under and by virtue of the aforesaid pleadings * * * all issues of fact and all questions of law involved [in this rule proceeding] are involved or will be involved in the [pending superior court suit]; and * * * can and will be settled, determined and adjudicated [there]; * * * that the superior court * * * has jurisdiction to do complete justice and to give full relief to all parties in reference to the subject matter of the suit; and to adjudicate all claims therein; * * * the pending equity suit in Laurens Superior Court will prevent a...