Richmond County v. Harper, 16929

• Decision Date: 15 February 1950
• Docket Number: No. 16929,16929
• Parties: RICHMOND COUNTY et al. v. HARPER et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 595

57 S.E.2d 595

206 Ga. 517

RICHMOND COUNTY et al. v. HARPER et al.

No. 16929.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Feb. 15, 1950.

Syllabus by the Court.

Under the facts in this case, the grant of a temporary injunction was error.

J. Walker Harper and C. E. Murphy filed their petition in equity against Richmond County, the County Commissioners of Richmond County, the Treasurer of Richmond County, the Clerk of the Superior Court of Richmond County, and the County Attorney. The petition referred to a suit then pending, since decided by this Court, Franklin v. Harper, 1949, 205 Ga. 779, 55 S.E.2d 221. The statement of facts there appearing will not be here stated again. The instant suit sought to enjoin the defendants from paying out of county funds certain travel expenses incurred by the county attorney in defense of the case of Franklin v. Harper, supra, and the court costs incurred in that case. The contentions were that the suit was one against Franklin in his individual capacity, and that the county could not legally defray the legitimate expenses of defending the suit.

The defendants in the court below, by way of amendment, sought to raise numerous constitutional questions as to the 'Voters' Registration Act', Ga.L. 1949, p. 1204. The case was submitted to the trial court for decision upon the pleadings. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the amendment, seeking to raise the constitutional questions as to the 'Voters' Registration Act,' to which ruling exceptions pendente lite were duly preserved.

The trial court granted a temporary injunction. The exceptions are to the judgment granting the temporary injunction, and upon the exception pendente lite.

Franklin H. Pierce, Augusta, for plaintiffs in error.

Congdon, Harper & Leonard, Augusta, for defendants in error.

WYATT, Justice.

1. The first legal question presented is whether or not the suit, Franklin v. Harper, 205 Ga. 779, 55 S.E.2d 221, 226, was a suit against Franklin individually, or against him by virtue of his position as Chairman of the Board of Roads and Revenues, and, therefore, a suit against the County. In Franklin v. Harper, supra, this court said: 'Under the provisions of the act, the Board of County Registrars, charged with enforcement of the act, are to be compensated out of county funds, and the defendant, a member of the Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues, by virtue of his office is charged with the duty of paying out such funds only for purposes provided by law. If a chairman of such board issues a warrant for an unlawful purpose upon which public funds are paid, he would be personally liable * * * We therefore hold that the defendant had such an interest as would authorize him to question the validity of the Voters' Registration Act under which the plaintiffs claim they are acting and contend that the defendant is under a duty to sign warrants for their compensation fixed by virtue of said act.'

The right to raise the question of the validity of the law would naturally, as to this public official, carry with it the duty to do so, if he in good faith questions the validity of the law in question, and there is no charge of bad faith here. We, having held that it was the right and, therefore, the duty of this public official to, in good faith, raise the question as to the validity of the 'Voters' Registration Act,' are now called upon to say that, when he does so, he must do so at his own expense, although it is the county's funds sought to be...