GA Code § 9-6-28 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 9 - Civil Practice|Chapter 6 - Extraordinary Writs|Article 2 - Mandamus|§ 9-6-28. Appeal

  Upon refusal of the court to grant the mandamus nisi, the applicant may appeal as in other cases. Either party dissatisfied with the judgment on the hearing of the answer to the mandamus nisi may likewise appeal.   Mandamus cases shall be heard on appeal under the same laws and rules as apply to injunction cases.    (Ga. L. 1882-83, p. 103, §§ 3, 5; Civil Code 1895, §§ 4874, 4875; Civil Code 1910, §§ 5447, 5448; Code 1933, §§ 64-110, 64-111; Ga. L. 1946, p. 726, § 1; Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 3-5/HB 927.)    The 2016 amendment,  effective January 1, 2017, deleted "to the Supreme Court," following "may appeal" in the first sentence of subsection (a) and substituted "on appeal" for "in the Supreme Court" in the middle of subsection (b). See Editor's notes for applicability.   Editor's notes.   - Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 1-1/HB 927, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Appellate Jurisdiction Reform Act of 2016.'"   Ga. L. 2016, p. 865, § 6-1/HB 927, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that: "Part III of this Act shall become effective on January 1, 2017, and shall apply to cases in which a notice of appeal or application to appeal is filed on or after such date."   Law reviews.   - For article on the 2016 amendment of this Code section, see 33 Georgia St. U.L. Rev. 205 (2016).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   Supreme Court empowered to review contempt of mandamus actions.    - A proceeding for contempt in violation of a mandamus absolute is so connected with the mandamus that a writ of error (now notice of appeal) to review a judgment therein should be treated as a case involving an extraordinary remedy within the constitutional provision conferring jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court. Settle v. McWhorter, 203 Ga. 93, 45 S.E.2d 210 (1947).   Court of Appeals lacking in jurisdiction.    - Where petitioners brought mandamus seeking to require judge to certify a bill of exceptions (now notice of appeal), and the judgment complained of is one wherein the Supreme Court and not the Court of Appeals would have jurisdiction of an appeal in that such judgment ordered, among other things, title to land transferred by deed and a petition seeking an injunction dismissed, the petition for writ of mandamus must be dismissed since the Court of Appeals was without authority either to pass on the merits of the petition or to transfer such petition to the Supreme Court. Scott v. Hubert, 99 Ga. App. 784, 109 S.E.2d 614 (1959).    Cited in Bradley v. Shelton, 189 Ga. 696, 7 S.E.2d 261 (1940); Nichols v. Hampton, 198 Ga. 327, 31 S.E.2d 659 (1944); Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Cravey, 209 Ga. 274, 71 S.E.2d 659 (1952); Banks County v. Stark, 88 Ga. App. 368, 77 S.E.2d 33 (1953); Jackson Elec. Membership Corp. v. Mathews, 210 Ga. 171, 78 S.E.2d 514 (1953); City of Dalton v. Smith, 158 Ga. App. 356, 280 S.E.2d 138 (1981).   RESEARCH REFERENCES   Am. Jur. 2d.   - 5 Am. Jur. 2d, Appeal and Error, § 693 et seq. 52 Am. Jur. 2d, Mandamus, §§ 479, 480.   C.J.S.   - 55 C.J.S., Mandamus, § 366. 74 C.J.S., Quo Warranto, § 89 et seq.