Hasty v. Hamrick

52 S.E.2d 470, 205 Ga. 84, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 535
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 16, 1949
Docket16529.
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 52 S.E.2d 470 (Hasty v. Hamrick) 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
Hasty v. Hamrick, 52 S.E.2d 470, 205 Ga. 84, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 535 (Ga. 1949).

Opinion

Hawkins, Justice.

W. F. Hasty and five other persons, alleging themselves to be residents, property owners, and taxpayers, of the County of Twiggs, filed their petition in Twiggs Superior Court against W. E. Hamrick, as the duly elected, qualified, and acting sheriff of that county, and against C. A. Duggan and others, as the duly elected, qualified, and acting Commissioners of Roads and Revenues of Twiggs County, Georgia, to enjoin the defendant Hamrick, as sheriff, from demanding and receiving, and the other defendants as Twiggs County commissioners from paying certain extra compensation of one hundred dollars per month or any other sum to the sheriff under and by virtue of an Act of the General Assembly, approved March 19, 1943 (Ga. L. 1943, p. 587), which Act is alleged to be null and void as being violative of article I, section IV, paragraph I of the Constitution of 1877 (Code, § 2-401), in that the act by its terms applied only to counties having a population between 9110 and 9120 according to the United States census of 1940, and any future census. It was stipulated on the trial of the case that, according to the 1940 Federal census, the population of Twiggs County, Georgia, is 9117, and that Twiggs County is the only county in the State of Georgia, according to the 1940 Federal census, that has a population between the minimum of 9110 and the maximum of 9120. It was shown that payments had been made in accordance with the terms of the act above referred to, and at the conclusion of the evidence the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defendants and judgment was entered accordingly. To this action on the part of the trial court the plaintiffs excepted. Held:

This case is controlled by the rulings of this court in Christian v. Moreland, 203 Ga. 20 (45 S. E. 2d, 201), wherein it was held that an act of the General Assembly, similar to the one here involved, and payments proposed to be made thereunder, were invalid for the reason here assigned. The evidence demanded a verdict for the plaintiffs, and the court erred in directing a verdict for the defendants.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Parker v. Davis
130 S.E.2d 723 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1963)
Tift v. Bush
75 S.E.2d 805 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Barge v. Camp
70 S.E.2d 360 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)
Calhoun County v. Early County
52 S.E.2d 854 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 S.E.2d 470, 205 Ga. 84, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hasty-v-hamrick-ga-1949.