Ryan v. Chatham County Com'rs
| Decision Date | 17 May 1948 |
| Docket Number | 16194. |
| Parties | RYAN v. COMMISSIONERS OF CHATHAM COUNTY et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The act of the General Assembly entitled 'An Act to provide an additional Judge to preside regularly in the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia so as to make two Judges in said court * * * and for other purposes' (Ga.L.1947, pp. 1104-1108), was so interwoven and related to the act of the General Assembly to abolish the City Court of Savannah (Ga.L.1947, pp. 1101-1103), that the act to create the additional judgeship was defeated by the result of the referendum provided for in the latter act.
2. All of the provisions of the act of the General Assembly (Ga.L.1947, p. 1104), being a part of a plan for the reorganization of the courts of Chatham County, are inseparable, and none of the provisions of the act (Ga.L.1947, p. 1104), providing for an additional Judge of the Superior Court in Chatham County, is valid.
The Court of Appeals (in Case No. 31916) certified the following questions to this court:
'1. Did the act of the General Assembly designated as Act No. 286 (House Bill No. 457), entitled 'An Act to provide an additional Judge to preside regularly in the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia so as to make two Judges in said Court * * * and for other purposes.' Acts 1947, pp. 1104-1108, approved March 28, 1947, become effective on January 1, 1948, as provided in section 10 of the act, irrespective of whether the referendum provided for in Act No. 285 (House Bill No. 456), entitled 'An Act to repeal all of the several laws relating to the City Court of Savannah and to abolish said Court, and for other purposes,' Acts 1947, pp. 1101-1103, resulted in the disapproval of the act abolishing the city court.
Andrew J. Ryan, Jr., Sol. Gen., Henry B. Brennan, Emanuel Javetz Malberry Smith, Jr., and Sylvan A. Garfunkel, all of Savannah, for plaintiff in error.
John J. Bouhan, of Savannah, for defendants in error.
1. The answer to the first question is that Act No. 286 (H.B. No. 457), entitled 'An Act to provide an additional Judge to preside regularly in the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia' (Ga.L.1947, pp. 1104-1108), is directly interlocked and interwoven with Act No. 285 (H.B. No. 456), entitled, 'An Act to repeal all of the several laws relating to the City Court of Savannah and to abolish said Court.' Ga.L.1947, pp. 1101-1103. The additional judgeship sought to be created in the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia was dependent upon the abolishment of the City Court of Savannah as provided for in Act No. 285 (H.B. No. 456). If the qualified voters failed to abolish the City Court of Savannah, then it is self-evident from a careful reading of the two acts under consideration that the legislature did not intend to create an additional Superior Court judgeship for the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia.
It is an elementary rule of statutory construction that a statute must be construed in relation to other statutes of which it is a part, and all statutes relating to the same subject-matter, briefly called statutes 'in pari materia,' are construed together, and harmonized wherever possible, so as to ascertain the legislative intendment and give effect thereto. It is simply the duty of this court in interpreting the statutes now under consideration to look diligently for the intention of the legislature, keeping in view at all times the old law, the evil, and the remedy. Code, § 102-102(9). While we recognize the rule that statutes in pari materia may not be resorted to where the language of the statute under consideration is clear, it is equally as well settled that, where the terms of the statute to be construed are ambiguous or its significance is of a doubtful character, it becomes necessary to give proper consideration to other related statutes in order to ascertain the legislative intent in reference to the whole system of laws of which the doubtful statute is a part.
Applying the above principle of law to the statutes now under consideration, we find that section 6 of the act creating an additional judgeship in the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit, Act No. 286 (H.B. No. 457), provides: 'Honorable Alexander R. MacDonell having been reelected Judge of the City Court of Savannah by the people of Chatham County for a term beginning January 1, 1947, and ending December 31, 1950, and this Act being a companion Act to one abolishing the City Court of Savannah, the said Alexander R. MacDonell is hereby named as a Judge of the Superior Court for the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia, in the additional Judgeship created by this Act.' (Italics ours.)
The language used by the legislature, 'and this Act being a companion Act to one abolishing the City Court of Savannah,' certainly relates this act to the one which proposes to abolish the office of Judge of the City Court of Savannah. The use of the words, 'this Act being a companion Act,' leaves some doubt as to the significance and effect to be given Act No. 286 in the creation of the additional judgeship for the Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit. Since the significance of the above language is not clear and we can not be sure of the legislative purpose in calling this a companion act to the one abolishing the office of Judge of the City Court of Savannah, it becomes necessary and proper...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lamad Ministries v. DOUGHERTY CTY. BD. TAX ASS.
...must be given effect, since it was neither repealed nor modified when OCGA § 48-5-311(g)(3) was passed. Ryan v. Commrs. of Chatham County, 203 Ga. 730, 732(1), 48 S.E.2d 86 (1948); Allison v. Domain, 158 Ga.App. 542, 544, 281 S.E.2d 299 (1981); Undercofler v. L.C. Robinson & Sons, Inc., 111......
-
Health Horizons v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO.
...statutory scheme. OCGA § 1-3-1(a); McPherson v. City of Dawson, 221 Ga. 861, 862, 148 S.E.2d 298 (1966); Ryan v. Commrs. of Chatham County, 203 Ga. 730, 731-732, 48 S.E.2d 86 (1948); Wigley v. Hambrick, 193 Ga.App. 903, 905(4), 389 S.E.2d 763 (1989); Allison v. Domain, 158 Ga.App. 542, 544,......
-
Corey Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Adjustments of City of Atlanta
...in pari materia may not be resorted to where the language of the statute under consideration is clear. Ryan v. Commrs. of Chatham County, 203 Ga. 730, 732, 48 S.E.2d 86 (1948). As the ordinances requiring measurement of distance along the curb specifically provide for such a method of measu......
-
VSI ENTERPRISES, INC. v. Edwards
...then such statutes should be harmonized whenever possible to assist in determining the legislative intent. Ryan v. Chatham County, 203 Ga. 730, 731-732, 48 S.E.2d 86 (1948); Monticello, Ltd. v. City of Atlanta, 231 Ga. App. 382, 383, 499 S.E.2d 157 (1998). In order to harmonize the two stat......