Crowder v. Department of State Parks

Supreme Court of Georgia

Crowder v. Department of State Parks

179 S.E.2d 231, 227 Ga. 143, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 616

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 7, 1971

Docket26195

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 179 S.E.2d 231 (Crowder v. Department of State Parks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crowder v. Department of State Parks, 179 S.E.2d 231, 227 Ga. 143, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 616 (Ga. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Grice, Justice.

Appellant’s complaint asserts that adherence by the courts of this State to the principle of sovereign immunity violates and deprives him of his rights under certain provisions of the State and Federal Constitutions. Actually, the case involves mere application of unquestioned and unambiguous provisions of the Constitutions to a given state of facts.

In this situation the rule is well established. "A mere assertion that one has been deprived of a right under the Constitution of this State or of a right under the Federal Constitution is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the Supreme Court. In order for the Supreme Court to have jurisdiction, the case must involve a 'construction of the Constitution where the meaning of some provision thereof is directly in question, or is doubtful by force of its own terms or under the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States or of the Supreme Court of Georgia.’ ” Dixon v. State, 207 Ga. 192, 193 (60 SE2d 439). See also Jarvis v. State, 197 Ga. 704 (30 SE2d 484), and citations therein.

Therefore, since this case does not come within the jurisdiction of this court under the Constitution (Code Ann. § 2-3704), it is

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, Alfred L. Evans, Jr., A. Joseph Nardone, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Grice, Justice.

Appellant’s complaint asserts that adherence by the courts of this State to the principle of sovereign immunity violates and deprives him of his rights under certain provisions of the State and Federal Constitutions. Actually, the case involves mere application of unquestioned and unambiguous provisions of the Constitutions to a given state of facts.

In this situation the rule is well established. "A mere assertion that one has been deprived of a right under the Constitution of this State or of a right under the Federal Constitution is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the Supreme Court. In order for the Supreme Court to have jurisdiction, the case must involve a 'construction of the Constitution where the meaning of some provision thereof is directly in question, or is doubtful by force of its own terms or under the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States or of the Supreme Court of Georgia.’ ” Dixon v. State, 207 Ga. 192, 193 (60 SE2d 439). See also Jarvis v. State, 197 Ga. 704 (30 SE2d 484), and citations therein.

Therefore, since this case does not come within the jurisdiction of this court under the Constitution (Code Ann. § 2-3704), it is

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, Alfred L. Evans, Jr., A. Joseph Nardone, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 S.E.2d 231, 227 Ga. 143, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crowder-v-department-of-state-parks-ga-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack