---
title: Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III. General appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court.
collection: code
id: ga-const:art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii
cite_as: Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii/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=1109
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-vi-para-ii.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iv.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
omitted: notes
omitted_chars: 71299
omitted_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii.md?notes=all&start=11754
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 / SUPREME COURT
---

# Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III. General appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court.

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.

Unless otherwise provided by law, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction of the following classes of cases:

(1) Cases involving title to land;

(2) All equity cases;

(3) All cases involving wills;

(4) All habeas corpus cases;

(5) All cases involving extraordinary remedies;

(6) All divorce and alimony cases;

(7) All cases certified to it by the Court of Appeals; and

(8) All cases in which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed.

Review of all cases shall be as provided by law.

## Cross References

Jurisdiction and powers of Supreme Court generally, §§ 15-2-8, 15-2-9, and 15-3-3. Party’s right to appeal, see §§ 5-6-34 and 5-6-35.

## Law Reviews

For article, ‘‘Cities and Towns in Georgia: A Distinction With a Difference?,’’ see 14 Mercer L. Rev. 385 (1963). For article, ‘‘The Appellate Procedure Act of 1965,’’ (Art. 2, Ch. 6, T. 5), see 1 Ga. St. B.J. 451 (1965). For article discussing the inefficiency of mandamus and impeachment as remedies for judicial inaction, see 5 Ga. St. B.J. 467 (1969). For article, ‘‘The Civil Jurisdiction of State and Magistrate Courts,’’ see 24 Ga. St. B.J. 29 (1987). For article, ‘‘Georgia’s Constitutional Scheme for State Appellate Jurisdiction,’’ see 6 Ga. St. B.J. 24 (2001). For annual survey of domestic relations law, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 221 (2004). For annual survey of appellate practice and procedure, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 35 (2005).

For comment on Bond v. Ray, 207 Ga. 559, 63 S.E.2d 399 (1951), see 3 Mercer L. Rev. 220 (1951). For comment on State v. Vaughn, 207 Ga. 583, 63 S.E.2d 357 (1951), see 14 Ga. B.J. 72 (1951). For comment on Tant v. State, 123 Ga. App. 760, 182 S.E.2d 502 (1971), advocating additional reform of Georgia’s system of appellate review of criminal cases, see 9 Ga. St. B.J. 490 (1973).

## 1976 Constitution.

Art. VI, Sec. II, Para. IV.

## Decision Rendered by Divided Supreme Court Is Authoritative as Precto Answer.

When the answer to a certified question would constitute the decision in the main case, the Supreme Court will decline to answer the question. Lawrence v. State, 268 Ga. 420, 489 S.E.2d 850 (1997).

Court of Appeals was created as an arm of the Supreme Court with no original jurisdiction for the purpose of correcting errors of law in lower tribunals. Harmon v. Southern Ry., 123 Ga. App. 309, 180 S.E.2d 604 (1971).

The issue of venue is within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals. Beauchamp v. Knight, 261 Ga. 608, 409 S.E.2d 208 (1991).

## Limited Jurisdiction of Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals only has jurisdiction in all cases in which such jurisdiction has not been conferred by the Constitution upon the Supreme Court. Evans v. Pennington, 50 Ga. App. 146, 177 S.E. 357 (1934); Findley v. City of Vidalia, 204 Ga. 279, 49 S.E.2d 658 (1948); United States Cas. Co. v. Georgia S. & Fla. Ry., 212 Ga. 569, 94 S.E.2d 422 (1956).

Ga. L. 1963, p. 70, § 1 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-19-30), establishing the State Bar, does not violate this paragraph. Wallace v. Wallace, 225 Ga. 102, 166 S.E.2d 718, cert. denied, 396 U.S. 939, 90 S. Ct. 369, 24 L. Ed. 2d 240 (1969) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III).

## Interpretation of Legal Document.

— Appeals filed by a trustee and a beneficiary were transferred from the supreme court to the court of appeals because the cases did not come within the supreme court’s appellate jurisdiction over ‘‘equity cases’’ under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III; the issue presented on appeal, how to interpret a specific provision of a legal document, was a straightforward legal question. Durham v. Durham, 291 Ga. 231, 728 S.E.2d 627 (2012).

Allowing videotaping of criminal

## Calendar Proceedings.

Trial court erred in excluding a camera and denying a purported student’s request to make video recordings of the criminal calendar proceedings because the trial court erred in the court’s application of O.C.G.A. § 15-1-10.1 and did not properly consider the factors set forth therein. McLaurin v. Ott, 327 Ga. App. 488, 759 S.E.2d 567 (2014).

Cited in Henderson v. Easters, 178 Ga. App. 867, 345 S.E.2d 42 (1986); Jost v. Jost, 179 Ga. App. 1, 345 S.E.2d 115 (1986); Lemke v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 182 Ga. App. 700, 356 S.E.2d 739 (1987); Rybert & Co. v. City of Atlanta, 258 Ga. 347, 368 S.E.2d 739 (1988); Cohran v. Haldi, 189 Ga. App. 529, 376 S.E.2d 416 (1988); Piedmont Properties, Inc. v. Sims, 195 Ga. App. 353, 393 S.E.2d 496 (1990); Bryant v. Employees Retirement Sys., 264 Ga. 125, 441 S.E.2d 757 (1994); Firearms Training Sys. v. Sharp, 213 Ga. App. 566, 445 S.E.2d 538 (1994); United States Fid. and Guar. Co. v. Park ’N Go of Ga., Inc., 66 F.3d 273 (11th. Cir. 1995); Redfearn v. Huntcliff Homes Ass’n, 243 Ga. App. 222, 531 S.E.2d 376 (2000); Henson v. Tucker, 278 Ga. App. 859, 630 S.E.2d 64 (2006); Bishop v. Patton, 288 Ga. 600, 706 S.E.2d 634 (2011); Southern LNG, Inc. v. MacGinnitie, 294 Ga. 657, 755 S.E.2d 683 (2014); DOCO Credit Union v. Chambers, 330 Ga. App. 633, 768 S.E.2d 808 (2015).

Right of Review

Right of appeal is not absolute, but is based upon the conditions imposed by the General Assembly for bringing cases to the appellate courts. Fife v. Johnston, 225 Ga. 447, 169 S.E.2d 167 (1969); State v. Hollomon, 132 Ga. App. 304, 208 S.E.2d 167 (1974).

## When Jurisdiction Alterable by General Assembly.

Jurisdiction of Supreme Court over cases not involving construction of Constitution or constitutionality of statutes is alterable Right of Review (Cont’d) by legislative enactment. Taylor v. Stovall, 155 Ga. 894, 118 S.E. 715 (1923).

Power of General Assembly to set

## Conditions on Right of Review.

This paragraph vests in the General Assembly the power to prescribe conditions as to the right of review of a case in the Supreme Court. Gordy v. Dunwody, 210 Ga. 810, 83 S.E.2d 7 (1954) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III). bly authority to enact laws placing conditions upon appeals. Fife v. Johnston, 225 Ga. 447, 169 S.E.2d 167 (1969); State v. Hollomon, 132 Ga. App. 304, 208 S.E.2d 167 (1974); Reed v. Hopper, 235 Ga. 298, 219 S.E.2d 409 (1975).

General Assembly has no authority

## Constitution Gives General Assem-to Prescribe Cases to Supreme Court.

Collins v. State, 239 Ga. 400, 236 S.E.2d 759 (1977).

Supreme Court not a court for

## Hearing Appeals From Court of Appeals Generally.

As to most cases, that court is and should be considered as a court of last resort, though technically it is not such. Adair v. Traco Div., 192 Ga. 59, 14 S.E.2d 466, answer conformed to, 65 Ga. App. 110, 15 S.E.2d 306 (1941).

## When Supreme Court Will Not Review Court of Appeals Decisions.

Supreme Court will not ordinarily review judgment of Court of Appeals because of assignment of error complaining that Court of Appeals has erroneously construed pleadings, nor will it ordinarily review a decision of the Court of Appeals merely because of an assignment of error complaining that the judgment of such court is incorrect. Frazier v. Southern Ry., 200 Ga. 590, 37 S.E.2d 774 (1946).

Correction of Errors of Fact

Where trial judge has discharged the judge’s duty to review evidence, the Supreme Court has no power to

## Pass Judgment on Issues of Fact.

Merritt v. State, 190 Ga. 81, 8 S.E.2d 386 (1940).

Supreme Court is a court for the correction of errors of law only, and cannot undertake to correct errors of fact. Mills v. State, 188 Ga. 616, 4 S.E.2d 453 (1939).

Where eight trial jurors petition trial judge to grant a new trial, and trial judge declines to do so, no question of law is presented to the Supreme Court to authorize a judgment of reversal. Myrick v. State, 199 Ga. 244, 34 S.E.2d 36 (1945), overruled on other grounds, Dunagan v. State, 269 Ga. 590, 502 S.E.2d 726 (1998).

Title to Land

1. In General

Meaning of term ‘‘cases involving title to land.’’ — ‘‘Cases involving title to land,’’ as that term is used in this paragraph, refers to and means actions at law, such as ejectment and statutory substitutes, in which the plaintiff asserts a presently enforceable legal title against the possession of the defendant for the purpose of recovering the land. Bond v. Ray, 207 Ga. 559, 63 S.E.2d 399 (1951), commented on in 3 Mercer L. Rev. 220 (1951); Reid v. Standard Oil Co., 218 Ga. 289, 127 S.E.2d 678 (1962); Barton v. Gammell, 238 Ga. 643, 235 S.E.2d 18, aff’d, 143 Ga. App. 291, 238 S.E.2d 445 (1977) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III).

Supreme Court has no jurisdiction when title to land is not directly, but only incidentally, involved. Colley v. Atlanta & W. Point R.R., 156 Ga. 43, 118 S.E. 712 (1923); Radcliffe v. Jones, 174 Ga. 324, 162 S.E. 679 (1932); Reece v. McCrary, 179 Ga. 812, 177 S.E. 741 (1934); Lewis v. Fry, 194 Ga. 842, 22 S.E.2d 817 (1942); Miller v. Ray, 208 Ga. 27, 64 S.E.2d 449 (1951).

Since the children sought a determination that their deceased parent had a one-half interest in a home occupied by the parent and the second spouse and the second spouse sought a determination that the parent had no interest in the property, the parties were not seeking recovery of the land and the case was not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Cole v. Cole, 205 Ga. App. 332, 422 S.E.2d 230 (1992).

Plaintiff must depend for recovery

## On Maintenance of Title.

The Supreme Court has jurisdiction of cases in which the plaintiff asserts the plaintiff’s title to the land in question, and depends for a recovery upon the plaintiff’s maintenance of it; or to supply a link in the chain, wanting by reason of accident or other cause. Colley v. Atlanta & W. Point R.R., 156 Ga. 43, 118 S.E. 712 (1923).

Plaintiff must not be in actual pos-

## Session of Land.

Where petition shows that the plaintiff is in actual possession of the land described in the deed involved in the action, the action is not one at law for the recovery of land. Bond v. Ray, 207 Ga. 559, 63 S.E.2d 399 (1951), commented on in 3 Mercer L. Rev. 220 (1951).

Action seeking legal and equitable

## Title to Estate.

The Supreme Court’s exclusive jurisdiction of cases ‘‘involving title to land’’ was not applied to an action by alleged illegitimate children of a decedent seeking legal and equitable title to the decedent’s estate. Tolbert v. Whatley, 223 Ga. App. 508, 478 S.E.2d 587 (1996).

Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in contest over title growing out of tion. Adams v. Bishop, 174 Ga. 262, 162 S.E. 531 (1932).

In action seeking rule nisi to require defendants to show cause why nonjudicial foreclosure proceeding should not be allowed to proceed, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Graham v. Tallent, 235 Ga. 47, 218 S.E.2d 799 (1975).

In action for abatement in contract alty, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Halliburton v. Collier, 201 Ga. 340, 39 S.E.2d 698 (1946).

In appeal from judgment in favor of widow’s application for dower, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Rowe v. Rowe, 221 Ga. 820, 147 S.E.2d 447 (1966). tion to dismiss) to petition seeking to ranty of title, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Sanders v. Calloway, 211 Ga. 580, 87 S.E.2d 397 (1955).

In action to confirm sale of land under power of sale, pursuant to former Code 1933, § 37-608 (see now O.C.G.A. § 44-14-161), the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Tingle v. Atlanta Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 211 Ga. 636, 87 S.E.2d 841 (1955).

Determining if defective security

## Proceeding for Homestead Exempprice for Purchase of Described re-In Overruling of Demurrer (now Morecover Damages for Breach of Wardeed Exists.

Where purchaser of property at a tax sale sought determination that assignee of security deed had no interest in the property by virtue of a defective security deed in the chain of title, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction. Hooten v. Goldome Credit Corp., 224 Ga. App. 581, 481 S.E.2d 550 (1997).

Where dispossessory warrant is sued out to evict tenant who files a counter-affidavit alleging defensive facts only, and no equitable or affirmative relief is prayed, the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction. Brumfield v. Home Owners Loan Corp., 196 Ga. 821, 27 S.E.2d 678 (1943). cal church held property in trust for national church within Supreme


> The printed notes continue for 71,299 more characters, not shown here. Continue at https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-vi-sec-vi-para-iii.md?notes=all&start=11754