Thompson v. City Of Atlanta, 9081.
| Decision Date | 20 February 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 9081.,9081. |
| Citation | 168 S.E. 312,176 Ga. 489 |
| Parties | THOMPSON . v. CITY OF ATLANTA. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; John D. Humphries, Judge.
Proceeding between John Thompson and the City of Atlanta. To review the judgment, the first-named party brings error.
Transferred to the Court of Appeals.
Walter A. Sims and Love B. Harrell, both of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
J. L. Mayson, C. S. Winn, and J. C. Savage, all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
[I] 1. The constitutional amendment of 1916 (Ga. Laws 1916, p. 19), which was submitted to and ratified by the people that year, defines the respective jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals of this state. By the terms of this amendment, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to decide questions of law involving only the application of unquestioned and unambiguous provisions of the Constitution to a given state of facts, but which do not involve the construction. of some constitutional provision which may be doubtful either in its own terms or under decisions of the Supreme Court of this state or of the United States. And the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to decide questions that do not involve the constitutionality of any law of the United States or any treaty thereof, or of any law of this state. Gulf Paving Co. v. City of Atlanta, 149 Ga, 114, 99 S. E. 374; Howell v. State, 153 Ga. 201, 111 S. E. 675; Dennard v. State, 176 Ga. --, 168 S. E. 310.
2. Since this case raises only a question as to the constitutionality of a certain municipal ordinance of the city of Atlanta, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction, to decide the questions raised by the bill of exceptions.
Transferred to Court of Appeals.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. Jones
...law within the meaning of said clause of the Constitution. In support of this contention, they cite such cases as Thompson v. City of Atlanta, 176 Ga. 489, 168 S.E. 312, and Maner v. Dykes, 183 Ga. 118, 187 S.E. 699. These cases simply rule that a municipal ordinance is not a 'State statute......
-
Morris v. Tatum, 24075.
...of a municipal ordinance or resolution. Elliott v. City Council of Augusta, 177 Ga. 680, 170 S. E. 787; Thompson v. City of Atlanta, 176 Ga. 489, 168 S. E. 312. However, under an older decision of the Supreme Court, which has never been overruled or criticized by that court, a municipal ord......
-
Dade County v. State
...has jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to decide the question raised by the bill of exceptions. Thompson v. Atlanta, 176 Ga. 489, 168 S.E. 312; Elliott v. Augusta, 177 Ga. 680, 170 S.E. 787; Stafford v. Valdosta, 178 Ga. 224, 172 S.E. 461; Maner v. Dykes, 183 Ga. 118, 1......
-
Dade County v. State
... ... [46 S.E.2d 346] ... the intervenors allege that a city ordinance was contrary to ... the terms of the act of 1939, Ga.L.1939, p ... exceptions. Thompson v. Atlanta, 176 Ga. 489, 168 ... S.E. 312; Elliott v. Augusta, 177 Ga ... ...