---
title: Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I. Jurisdiction of classes of courts of limited jurisdiction.
collection: code
id: ga-const:art-vi-sec-iii-para-i
cite_as: Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-i
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-i.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-i/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=f5de823e_0#page=1071
date: 2016
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/index.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-ii-para-x.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-ii.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
omitted: notes
omitted_chars: 8745
omitted_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-i.md?notes=all&start=11780
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: CONSTITUTION OF THE / JUDICIAL BRANCH / CLASSES OF COURTS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION
---

# Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I. Jurisdiction of classes of courts of limited jurisdiction.

A constitution provision shown as in force is in force as printed in the volume. A court decision can make a printed provision unenforceable without changing the volume, and the volume does not record that.

The magistrate, juvenile, and state courts shall have uniform jurisdiction as provided by law. Probate courts shall have such jurisdiction as now or hereafter provided by law, without regard to uniformity.

## Cross References

State courts, § 15-7-1 et seq. Jurisdiction of probate courts generally, § 15-9-30 et seq. Magistrate courts, § 15-10-1 et seq. Juvenile courts, Ch. 11, T. 15. Uniform Rules for the Probate Courts.

## Editor's Notes

In light of the similarity of the provisions, decisions under former Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. II and antecedent provisions, relating to specific powers of the probate courts, are included in the annotations for this paragraph.

Purpose of Ga. Const. 1945, Art. 6, Sec. 6, Para. II(b) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I and Art. IX, Sec. I, Para. III) is to provide for speedy trials for persons charged with misdemeanor violations upon highways. It was not the purpose of Ga. Const. 1945, Art. 6, Sec. 6, Para. II(b) to divest existing courts of jurisdiction in such cases, or to transfer jurisdiction from existing courts to another court not having such jurisdiction prior to the enactment of II(b). Gibson v. Gober, 204 Ga. 714, 51 S.E.2d 664 (1949).

Intent of Ga. Const. 1945, Art. 6, Sec. 6, Para. II(b) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I and Art. IX, Sec. I, Para. III) is to confer jurisdiction as to subject matter upon police courts with the same restrictions as are imposed upon courts of ordinary (now probate courts). Clarke v. Johnson, 199 Ga. 163, 33 S.E.2d 425 (1945).

In light of the similarity of the provisions, decisions under former Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. VII, Para. II and antecedent provisions, relating to jurisdiction of the former justice of the peace courts (now magistrate courts), are included in the annotations for this paragraph.

This paragraph is not self-executing. Tibbs v. Williamson, 61 Ga. 74 (1878); Humphrey v. Johnson, 13 Ga. App. 557, 79 S.E. 530 (1913).

Right of appeals under Ch. 2, T. 5 is

In light of the similarity of the provisions, opinions under former Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. II and antecedent provisions, relating to specific powers of the probate courts, are included in the annotations for this paragraph. plate creation of a court, but rather enlargement of the jurisdiction of the probate court. 1969 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 69-10 (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I).

In light of the similarity of the provisions, opinions under former Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. VII, Para. II and antecedent provisions, relating to jurisdiction of the former justice of the peace courts (now magistrate courts), are included in the annotations for this paragraph.

Justice of the peace courts have jurisdiction in bail trover cases up to the amount of $200.00. 1945-47 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 77.

Justice of the peace may only honor applications for writs of possession as provided by former Code 1933, § 67-701 et seq. (see now O.C.G.A. Part 4, Art. 7, Ch. 14, T. 44) when ceed $200.00. 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U74-104.

Justice of the peace may not issue

## Law Reviews

For annual survey of wills, trusts, guardianships, and fiduciary administration, see 58 Mercer L. Rev. 423 (2006).

## 1976 Constitution.

Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. II; Art. VI, Sec. VII, Para. II.

## Courts.

The requirement of Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I that ‘‘magistrate ... courts shall have uniform jurisdiction as provided by law’’ relates to jurisdiction rather than to the method of selection and terms of office of magistrates. State v. Boatright, 256 Ga. 23, 342 S.E.2d 674 (1986).

Jurisdiction over foreign plaintiff’s

## Contract Action.

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, and the seller did not respond, 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).

## Termination of Parental Rights.

Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 15-11-28(a)(2)(C), the superior court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to terminate the husband’s parental rights because the biological father’s petition to legitimate a child who was born in wedlock was a petition to terminate the parental rights of the legal father; after the superior court determined that the biological father had not abandoned his opportunity interest, the issue became whether the superior court could grant the petition to legitimate the child, and to grant the legitimation petition required the superior court to first terminate the parental rights of the husband, who was the legal father. Brine v. Shipp, 291 Ga. 376, 729 S.E.2d 393 (2012).

Cited in Schroeder v. Hunter Douglas, Inc., 172 Ga. App. 897, 324 S.E.2d 746 (1984); Freeman v. State, 194 Ga. App. 905, 392 S.E.2d 330 (1990); EHCA Cartersville, LLC v. Turner, 280 Ga. 333, 626 S.E.2d 482 (2006); Mauldin v. Mauldin, 322 Ga. App. 507, 745 S.E.2d 754 (2013).

Probate Courts

## Limited Authority as to County Matters.

This paragraph must be construed in connection with the other provisions of the Constitution, and carries the implication that the courts of ordinary (now probate courts) have no authority as to county matters except such ‘‘as may be conferred on them by law.’’ Harrison v. Southern Ry., 44 Ga. App. 49, 160 S.E. 656 (1931) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I).

## Legislative Authority.

Authority of General Assembly to prescribe powers of ordinary (now probate judge) over county affairs necessarily includes authority to increase or diminish such powers. Bleckley v. Vickers, 225 Ga. 593, 170 S.E.2d 695 (1969).

Where probate judge sits for county

## Purposes.

The ordinary (now probate judge) sits for county purposes only in those counties where jurisdiction over county matters and county affairs has not been granted by legislative Act to a county commissioner or board of county commissioners. Bleckley v. Vickers, 225 Ga. 593, 170 S.E.2d 695 (1969).

Local Act creating board of county tionally infringe upon authority of

## Commissioners Does Not Unconstituordinary (now Probate Judge).

Bleckley v. Vickers, 225 Ga. 593, 170 S.E.2d 695 (1969).

Judgments subject to revision and

## Vacation.

Courts of record retain full control over their orders and judgments during the term at which they are rendered, and in the exercise of sound discretion may revise or vacate them, as the ends of justice may require; the court of ordinary (now probate court) is a court of record, and its judgments are subject to this same rule and may be set aside during the term when entered, in the sound discretion of the ordinary (now probate judge). Hall v. First Nat’l Bank, 87 Ga. App. 142, 73 S.E.2d 252 (1952), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 896, 75 S. Ct. 215, 99 L. Ed. 704 (1954). tion to remove a trustee. Moring v. Moring, 228 Ga. App. 662, 492 S.E.2d 558 (1997).

Probate court has no authority to appoint another as guardian of the person of a child who has a living natural guardian unless the loss of that status has been ascertained and declared in some regular proceeding authorized by law, after due notice is given. Whitlock v. Barrett, 158 Ga. App. 100, 279 S.E.2d 244 (1981).

Range of appointment limited

## Probate Court Did Not Have Jurisdicwhere Minor Has Natural Guardian.

For a minor having no guardian, the judge of the probate court may appoint a guardian of the person and property, or of either, but if the minor has a natural guardian, it certainly cannot be said in a broad sense that he or she has no guardian; in such case the range of appointment is limited to guardianship of the property, for it is only as to property that there is no guardian. Whitlock v. Barrett, 158 Ga. App. 100, 279 S.E.2d 244 (1981).

## Compromise of Claim.

The probate court’s plenary jurisdiction does not cease upon the guardian’s compromise of a contested or doubtful claim. Gnann v. Woodall, 270 Ga. 516, 511 S.E.2d 188 (1999).

No jurisdiction to try title claims on

## Application for Year’s Support.

The probate court has no jurisdiction to try conflicting claims of title to real property on an application for a year’s support. Johnson v. Johnson, 199 Ga. App. 549, 405 S.E.2d 544 (1991).

Probate court erred by allowing the objections of a bank and a decedent’s parents solely on the basis of adverse title and by denying a year’s support to the widow when the widow failed to meet the resulting burden of proof because the probate court lacked the jurisdiction under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. 6, Sec. 3, Para. I and O.C.G.A. § 15-9-30 to determine that the relevant money-market account and real property were not part of the estate; despite the jurisdictional limitation and the lack of an appropriate objection, the probate court proceeded to conduct a hearing as to the amount necessary for the widow’s support, thereby inappropriately placing upon the widow a burden of proof that was contrary to O.C.G.A. § 53-3-7(a) and otherwise lacking in the absence of the jurisdictionally defective objections to the petition. In re Mahmoodzadeh, 314 Ga. App. 383, 724 S.E.2d 797 (2012).

No jurisdiction to adjudicate

## Claims of Title to Property.

Probate court does not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate conflicting claims of title to Probate Courts (Cont’d) property; thus, where decedent’s widow asserted an ownership interest in property sought by the executor of the estate, and order of the probate court giving possession of such property to the executor was void, the widow could not be found in contempt for noncompliance with the order. In re Estate of Adamson, 215 Ga. App. 613, 451 S.E.2d 501 (1994). Former Justice of the Peace Courts

## Consistent with This Paragraph.

Helmly v. Davis, 100 Ga. 493, 28 S.E. 231 (1897).

Justice of the peace court has jurisdiction of action to recover debt less

## Than $200.00.

Where one is indebted to another on an open account in excess of $200.00, and gives two checks for a part thereof, which are credited on the account, an action against that person by the creditor for less than $200.00 to recover the full amount of the balance of the open account will lie, and is within the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace court even though another action has been filed to recover on the checks which had been dishonored. Parker v. Timberlake Grocery Co., 71 Ga. App. 280, 30 S.E.2d 650 (1944).

Justice of the peace courts have dences of debt although they are given for one and the same debt or consideration. Parker v. Timberlake Grocery Co., 71 Ga. App. 280, 30 S.E.2d 650 (1944).

Extent of criminal jurisdiction of

## Jurisdiction of Suits on Distinct Evijustice Court.

While justice courts have jurisdiction with respect to certain matters in the administration of criminal law, such courts did not have jurisdiction in criminal actions as the word was defined in former Code 1933, §§ 3-101-3-103 (see now O.C.G.A. § 9-2-1). Pate v. Taylor Chem. Co., 88 Ga. App. 127, 76 S.E.2d 131 (1953).

Effect of Act creating municipal diction would not exceed that of jus-

## Court Providing That Criminal Juristice Court.

Where Act creating municipal court provides that the criminal jurisdiction of the court would not exceed the jurisdiction by law in the justice courts, but would extend over the entire county, such municipal court is not thereby given jurisdiction of criminal actions, though it might have jurisdiction with respect to certain matters in connection with the administration of criminal law. Pate v. Taylor Chem. Co., 88 Ga. App. 127, 76 S.E.2d 131 (1953).

Section providing for abatement of


> The printed notes continue for 8,745 more characters, not shown here. Continue at https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-iii-para-i.md?notes=all&start=11780