Goss v. Gordon County
This text of 133 S.E. 68 (Goss v. Gordon County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The term “employee,” in section 2 (h) of the workmen’s compensation act (Ga. L. 1920, p. 167), which provides that “employee” shall include “every person . . in the service of another under any contract of hire,” etc., does not apply to a county policeman elected or appointed by the county, under the Civil Code (1910), § 849 et seq.; since it is not the relation of employer and employee which exists between a county and such a county policeman, but such a county policeman is a public officer. Marlow v. Mayor &c. of Savannah, 28 Ga. App. 368 (110 S. E. 923); Bunch v. Macon, 29 Ga. App. 290, 294 (115 S. E. 40). Prior to the act of 1914 (Civil Code of 1910, § 849) it was held [326]*326that the appointment of such an unauthorized official did not constitute such a person an official. Herrington v. State, 103 Ga. 318 (29 S. E. 931, 68 Am. St. R. 95); Turner v. Fulton County, 109 Ga. 633 (34 S. E. 1024). While the law recognized a difference in the method of amotion of an officer where tenure is prescribed by law and where one holds merely at the pleasure of the governing authorities, in either case, where the office is expressly established or expressly authorized by law, the status of the person elected or appointed to the office legally provided for is that of a public official. See Burney v. Mayor &c. of Boston, 24 Ga. App. 7 (2) (100 S. E. 28).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
133 S.E. 68, 35 Ga. App. 325, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 1131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goss-v-gordon-county-gactapp-1926.