GA Code § 15-7-4 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 15 - Courts|Chapter 7 - State Courts of Counties|Article 1 - General Provisions|§ 15-7-4. Jurisdiction; Authority of State Court Judges

  Each state court shall have jurisdiction, within the territorial limits of the county or counties for which it was created and concurrent with the superior courts, over the following matters:   The trial of criminal cases below the grade of felony;   The trial of civil actions without regard to the amount in controversy, except those actions in which exclusive jurisdiction is vested in the superior courts;   The hearing of applications for and the issuance of arrest and search warrants;   The holding of courts of inquiry;   The punishment of contempt by fines not exceeding $1,000.00, by imprisonment not exceeding 20 days, or both; and   Review of decisions of other courts as may be provided by law.     Each state court shall have jurisdiction, within the territorial limits of the county or counties for which it was created and concurrent with other courts having such jurisdiction, over possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, in accordance with Code Sections 16-13-2 and 16-13-30.   Each judge of the state court shall have authority to perform any judicial act which he or she is lawfully entitled to perform, regardless of where such judge is located when such judicial act is performed.     (Code 1981, §15-7-4, enacted by Ga. L. 1983, p. 1419, § 2; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1377, § 1; Ga. L. 2013, p. 561, § 2/SB 66; Ga. L. 2021, p. 423, § 1-2/HB 635.)    The 2021 amendment,  effective May 4, 2021, added subsection (c).   Cross references.   - Conflicts - state and federal courts, Uniform Superior Court Rules, Rule 17.    Authority of superior court judges, § 15-6-16.    Authority of probate court judges, § 15-9-30.    Authority of magistrate to act, § 15-10-2.   Law reviews.   - For article, "The Civil Jurisdiction of State and Magistrate Courts," see 24 Ga. St. B. J. 29 (1987). For article, "How Not to Get Thrown in Jail," see 22 Ga. Bar. J. 17 (June 2017).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   Editor's notes.   - In light of the similarities of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code Section 15-7-7 are included in the annotations for this Code section.    State court has jurisdiction over all misdemeanor violations of the Uniform Rules of the Road dealing with traffic offenses. Diamond v. State, 151 Ga. App. 690, 261 S.E.2d 434 (1979).    State Court of Troup County had jurisdiction over city code misdemeanor violations. Poole v. State, 229 Ga. App. 406, 494 S.E.2d 251 (1997).    Superior courts retain exclusive jurisdiction as to declaratory judgment actions. EVI Equip., Inc. v. Northern Ins. Co., 178 Ga. App. 197, 342 S.E.2d 380 (1986), overruled on other grounds, Mitchell v. Southern Gen. Ins. Co., 185 Ga. App. 870, 366 S.E.2d 179 (1988).   Jurisdiction over issues involving Telephone Consumer Protection Act.    - Radio station properly raised an "as applied" attack upon the constitutionality of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227, as a defense to a civil action, and the trial court erred in ruling that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the issue; judicial review of federal statutes by state courts was especially appropriate when, as here, Congress granted to state courts exclusive jurisdiction over private actions brought to enforce the challenged federal statute. Schneider v. Susquehanna Radio Corp., 260 Ga. App. 296, 581 S.E.2d 603 (2003).   Jurisdiction of recorder's court limited.    - Because the recorder's court does not impanel juries, the court's jurisdiction over state misdemeanor traffic offenses is limited to cases in which the defendant waives the right to a jury trial; if the defendant demands a jury trial, the case is then forwarded to the solicitor's office (now district attorney's office) for docketing in the state court, which also has jurisdiction to hear cases involving misdemeanor state traffic offenses. State v. Serio, 257 Ga. App. 369, 571 S.E.2d 168 (2002).    Equitable remedies are beyond the jurisdiction of the state court. Forest Villas Condominium Ass'n v. Camerio, 205 Ga. App. 617, 422 S.E.2d 884 (1992).   Court lacked jurisdiction.    - State court lacked jurisdiction to provide the lessee with the remedy of equitable rescission of a commercial lease and a return of the security deposit because the lessee did not sue on rescission based upon a tender already made as the lessor never delivered possession of the property, and the lessee never paid any rent, and there was nothing for the lessee to tender or offer to tender to effectuate a rescission at law; because the lessee instead sought the affirmative powers of a court of equity to rescind, or undo, the contractual transaction, and the state court did not have jurisdiction over equity matters, the state court's order was vacated and the case was remanded with direction that the case be transferred to the superior court. Thor Gallery at South DeKalb, LLC v. Monger, 338 Ga. App. 235, 789 S.E.2d 806 (2016).   Fines for past violations deemed to be for criminal contempt.    - Fines imposed as punishment for violations of injunctive order occurring prior to entry of a contempt order were for criminal contempt and were limited to the maximum of $500. Grantham v. Universal Tax Sys., 217 Ga. App. 676, 458 S.E.2d 870 (1995).   No jurisdiction over    § 16-8-18 offense. - While O.C.G.A. § 16-8-18 (entering automobile with intent to commit theft) grants the trial judge discretion to impose misdemeanor punishment, former O.C.G.A. § 15-7-7 did not reduce the offense to a misdemeanor so as to give a state court jurisdiction. Bass v. State, 169 Ga. App. 520, 313 S.E.2d 776 (1984) (decided under former § 15-7-7).   State court judges may hear affidavit for dispossessory warrant.    - Affidavit required by former Code 1933, § 61-301 (see now O.C.G.A. § 44-7-50), for the initiation of dispossessory warrant proceedings against tenants holding over is to be made before the judge of the superior court or any justice of the peace, including judges of the state courts of each county. Howington v. W.H. Ferguson & Sons, 147 Ga. App. 636, 249 S.E.2d 687 (1978).   State court has jurisdiction over county ordinance violations.    - State Court of Cobb County has jurisdiction over cases involving alleged violations of county ordinances that constitute misdemeanors. Floyd v. State, 168 Ga. App. 645, 310 S.E.2d 749 (1983).   State Court of DeKalb County has jurisdiction over misdemeanor crimes.    - There was undisputed testimony that the misdemeanor crimes with which the defendant was charged and convicted occurred in DeKalb County, Georgia, and that the defendant was identified as the perpetrator of the offenses; thus, the record affirmatively established that the state court of DeKalb County exercised both personal and subject matter jurisdiction over the defendant. Freeman v. State, 194 Ga. App. 905, 392 S.E.2d 330 (1990).   Commission in portion of city airport within county.    - State court had jurisdiction over misdemeanor offenses which took place at that part of a city airport within the county. Hope v. State, 226 Ga. App. 392, 486 S.E.2d 658 (1997).    O.C.G.A. § 19-5-13 does not divest state courts of jurisdiction over trover or conversion actions in which the alleged trover or conversion results from the defendant's retention of property awarded to the plaintiff in a final divorce decree. Dunlap v. Pope, 177 Ga. App. 539, 339 S.E.2d 662 (1986).   Fine for past violations of discovery order is criminal contempt.    - Imposition of a $500 fine per day for past violations of a court's discovery order was an adjudication of criminal contempt and, therefore, the contempt order was affirmed on condition that the fines in excess of $500 be stricken. Carey Can., Inc. v. Hinely, 257 Ga. 150, 356 S.E.2d 202, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 898, 108 S. Ct. 233, 98 L. Ed. 2d 192 (1987).   Action on note given for federally funded student loan.    - State court was competent to adjudicate an action brought by the Georgia Higher Education Assistance Corporation on a note given for a federally funded student loan. Garrett v. Georgia Higher Educ. Assistance Corp., 217 Ga. App. 415, 457 S.E.2d 677 (1995).   State court had jurisdiction over unjust enrichment claim.    - State court had jurisdiction to give an award based on the equitable theory of unjust enrichment because the plaintiffs, the buyers of a sports bar, sought only damages against the sellers, not equitable relief. Lee v. Shim, 310 Ga. App. 725, 713 S.E.2d 906 (2011).   Application of Code section.    - O.C.G.A. § 15-7-4 sets forth the subject matter jurisdiction of state courts and is not applicable to a guarantor's claim of lack of jurisdiction; if the principal borrower resided in the county in which the action on the note was brought, default judgment against the choice of the guarantor was also authorized. Browne v. Trust Co. Bank, 205 Ga. App. 499, 422 S.E.2d 669 (1992).    When an out-of-state seller sued an in-state buyer in Georgia, despite a provision in the parties' contract for the jurisdiction of the courts of Texas, the courts of Georgia had subject matter jurisdiction under O.C.G.A. § 15-7-4(a)(2); Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. I, Para. I; Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I; and Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I; the parties waived the forum selection clause by either filing suit in Georgia or not responding. Euler-Siac S.P.A. (Creamar Spa) v. Drama Marble Co., 274 Ga. App. 252, 617 S.E.2d 203 (2005).    Inasmuch as it was established that a violation of O.C.G.A. § 40-6-395 was alleged to have occurred in Douglas County, the State Court of Douglas County had subject matter jurisdiction over the case; thus, the denial of defendant's motion in arrest of judgment was not error. Harbuck v. State, 280 Ga. 775, 631 S.E.2d 351 (2006).   Review of prior court's summary judgment ruling.    - Losing party had the right to bring a direct appeal from the order granting summary judgment and the party was not required to follow the discretionary application process under O.C.G.A. § 5-6-35(a)(1) as, given the plenary authority to revise and modify prior rulings, the transferee court was allowed to revisit the prior denial of a motion for summary judgment. Cook Pecan Company, Inc. v. McDaniel, 337 Ga. App. 186, 786 S.E.2d 852 (2016).    Cited in Austin v. Aldredge, 227 Ga. 119, 179 S.E.2d 66 (1971); Bell v. Stocks, 128 Ga. App. 799, 198 S.E.2d 209 (1973); Nat'l Health Servs., Inc. v. Townsend, 130 Ga. App. 700, 204 S.E.2d 299 (1974); King v. State, 133 Ga. App. 426, 211 S.E.2d 363 (1974); Atlanta Cas. Co. v. Williams, 135 Ga. App. 562, 218 S.E.2d 282 (1975); Shannondoah, Inc. v. Smith, 137 Ga. App. 378, 224 S.E.2d 465 (1976); Salvador v. Wals, 139 Ga. App. 362, 228 S.E.2d 384 (1976); Moody v. State, 145 Ga. App. 734, 245 S.E.2d 40 (1978); McSears v. State, 247 Ga. 48, 273 S.E.2d 847 (1981); Pfeiffer v. State, 173 Ga. App. 374, 326 S.E.2d 562 (1985); Ward v. State, 175 Ga. App. 410, 333 S.E.2d 669 (1985); Burden v. State, 176 Ga. App. 17, 335 S.E.2d 304 (1985); Cobb County v. Campbell, 256 Ga. 519, 350 S.E.2d 466 (1986); Mitchell v. Southern Gen. Ins. Co., 185 Ga. App. 870, 366 S.E.2d 179 (1988); Webb v. Ethridge, 849 F.2d 546 (11th Cir. 1988); Attwell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 189 Ga. App. 363, 375 S.E.2d 631 (1988); Fausnaugh v. State, 244 Ga. App. 263, 534 S.E.2d 554 (2000); EHCA Cartersville, LLC v. Turner, 280 Ga. 333, 626 S.E.2d 482 (2006); Blackmon v. Tenet Healthsystem Spalding, Inc., 288 Ga. App. 137, 653 S.E.2d 333 (2007); Cmty. State Bank v. Strong, 651 F.3d 1241 (11th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 568 U.S. 813, 133 S. Ct. 101, 184 L. Ed. 2d 22 (2012).   OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL   Choice of forum.   - Courts of Georgia may not restrict the suitor's choice of forum when jurisdiction of a cause of action is vested in more than one court. 1983 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U83-50.    State courts have concurrent jurisdiction with superior courts over cases brought pursuant to the Child Support Recovery Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-1 et seq. 1983 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U83-33.   Failure to comply with child support order punishable by contempt.   - State court judge may punish by contempt the willful failure to comply with a child support order previously issued by the judge's court. 1983 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U83-33.   RESEARCH REFERENCES   ALR.    - Future potential disability benefits under insurance policy as affecting question of jurisdictional amount, 165 A.L.R. 1073.    Interest and attorneys' fees as factors in determining jurisdictional amount, 167 A.L.R. 1243.   Modern status of rule relating to jurisdiction of state court to try criminal defendant brought within jurisdiction illegally or as result of fraud or mistake, 25 A.L.R.4th 157.   Personal jurisdiction over nonresident manufacturer of component incorporated in another product, 69 A.L.R.4th 14.   Criminal jurisdiction of municipal or other local court, 102 A.L.R.5th 525.   Validity, construction and application of Telephone Consumer Protection Act (47 U.S.C.A. § 227) - state cases, 77 A.L.R.6th 1.   7C Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Courts, § 1 et seq.