Robert v. Steed
| Citation | 60 S.E.2d 134,207 Ga. 41 |
| Decision Date | 13 June 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 17097,17097 |
| Parties | ROBERT v. STEED. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The respondent in this case forfeited his right to the office of county surveyor by his failure to give the bond required by law.
2. The Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Fulton County has authority to fill vacancies in county offices.
3. Such authority of the board of commissioners to fill vacancies in county offices does not violate the provisions of the Constitution requiring uniformity in county offices, or the constitutional prohibition against the passage of special laws in conflict with existing general laws.
Joe W. Steed, as claimant to the office of County Surveyor of Fulton County, in his application for leave to file an information in the nature of a quo warranto, against E. W. Robert, in substance alleged: The respondent was elected to the office of county surveyor in the general election in November, 1948. The respondent failed to file his official bond and qualify on or before January 1, 1949. On August 10, 1949, the Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Fulton County declared the office of county surveyor to be vacant, and by resolution, duly adopted, elected the relator to the office for the remainder of the term to which the respondent had been elected. Copy of the resolution is attached as an exhibit and made a part of the information. On August 19, 1949, the relator filed his official bond with the Ordinary of Fulton County, and took the oath of office required by law. He received a commission from the Governor of Georgia, a copy of which is attached and made a part of the information. The respondent is now assuming to act as county surveyor, is occupying the space in the courthouse designated by the governing authorities for the county surveyor, and retains in his possession the records of such office. The prayers were for rule nisi, that the respondent be ousted from the office, the relator be declared the rightful holder thereof, the respondent be required to deliver the office and records pertaining thereto, and for other relief.
On September 27, 1949, a judge of the superior court ordered the application and information in the nature of quo warranto filed, requiring that the respondent be served at least ten days before the time set for hearing, and that he show cause on October 14, 1949, why the prayers of the petition should not be granted. The respondent was duly served on September 28, 1949, and on October 13, 1949, he filed a general demurrer and an answer. His general demurrer was overruled and he filed exceptions pendente lite. An amendment to his answer was stricken on demurrer, and exceptions pendente lite were filed to this judgment.
At the trial of the case, after hearing evidence, the judge directed a verdict for the relator, and entered a judgment declaring that the relator had title to the office, and directing the respondent to surrender and deliver to the relator the office space and records belonging to the office of County Surveyor of Fulton County. The respondent's motion for new trial, as amended, was overruled. Error is assigned on this judgment and on his exceptions pendente lite.
Harold Sheats, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
W. S. Northcutt, Durwood T. Pye, E. A. Wright, James W. Dorsey, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
1. The first question for determination by this court is whether or not the office of County Surveyor of Fulton County was vacant at the time the relator was appointed to the office by the Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Fulton County.
The Code, § 89-501, provides: 'All offices in the State shall be vacated--* * * (6) By failing to apply for and obtain commissions or certificates, or by failing to qualify or give bond, or both, within the time prescribed by the laws and Constitution.' By the Code, § 89-408, it is provided that all county officers shall have until the first day of January next after their election to file the bonds required of them by law.
Honorable Eugene Gunby, Ordinary of Fulton County, upon the trial of the cause, testified: The respondent did not file a bond in the ordinary's office prior to January 1, 1949; he talked to both Mr. and Mrs. Robert over the telephone thereafter, stating to both of them that Mr. Robert had not made bond; he wrote the Secretary of State on May 10, 1949, stating that no bond had been given by the respondent, and that he was returning the dedimus and other papers; thereafter, on October 13, 1949, the respondent and the respondent's attorney came to his office and tendered a bond for the respondent.
On cross-examination the ordinary testified: He has no recollection of the respondent appearing with other officers and taking the oath of office on or about January 1, 1949; the bond tendered by the respondent on October 13, 1949, was for a term beginning January 1, 1949, and ending January 1, 1953; the ordinary refused to accept the bond due to the fact that he had previously returned the dedimus and other papers to the office of the Secretary of State, and the Commissioners of Fulton County had taken some action in the matter.
The respondent did not testify. The testimony of the ordinary was sufficient to show that the respondent did not tender an official bond on or before January 1, 1949; that he had not tendered such bond on May 10, 1949, when the ordinary returned the dedimus to the office of the Secretary of State; and that no bond was tendered until October 13, 1949, which was almost sixty days after the relator had made bond and taken the oath of office based upon his election to the office of county surveyor by the Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Fulton County.
In Ross v. Williamson, 44 Ga. 501, it was held that a county office would not be declared vacant for failure to make bond unless it be shown that the failure was due to the negligence or default of such officer, and that it had been the policy in this State not to strictly construe the requirement that an elective county official must file his bond on or before January 1. Whether or not this practice may have been continued, the failure of an elective official to file a bond for a period of more than ten months, after notice from the proper official that the bond had not been filed, cannot be a compliance with the law. Such disregard for the requirements of the statute amounted to a forfeiture by the respondent of any claim to the office of county surveyor. Especially would this be true when it appears that, due to the respondent's neglect and delay in filing any bond, another person had been named to the office of county surveyor, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Abercrombie
...432 (1923). There is no requirement of uniformity with regard to the powers and duties of county commissioners. See Robert v. Steed, 207 Ga. 41(3), 60 S.E.2d 134 (1950), and Wilson v. Jones, 218 Ga. 706, 710, 130 S.E.2d 227 The Constitution gives the General Assembly the power to create and......
-
Humthlett v. Reeves
...189 Ga. 637, 7 S.E.2d 387; Moore v. Whaley, 189 Ga. 647, 7 S.E.2d 394; Bowen v. Lewis, 201 Ga. 487, 489, 40 S.E.2d 80; Robert v. Steed, 207 Ga. 41, 60 S.E.2d 134; Hutchins v. Candler, 209 Ga. 415, 418, 73 S.E.2d 4. It is further contended that the act of 1937, Ga.L.1937-38, Ex.Sess., p. 790......
- Carney v. Franklin, 17119
-
Williams v. Richmond County
...of the 1976 Constitution, Article IX, § 1, PP 6, 7 hereinabove set forth. The same question was before this court in Robert v. Steed, 207 Ga. 41, 60 S.E.2d 134 (1950), where it was unanimously held that the Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Fulton County, created by an Act of the Gener......