Georgia CommonsArtículo VI. JUDICIAL BRANCH · Artículo VI. JUDICIAL BRANCH · Sección IV. SUPERIOR COURTS
Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I. Jurisdiction of superior courts.
Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
Una disposición constitucional que se muestra como vigente está vigente tal como está impresa en el volumen. Una decisión judicial puede hacer inaplicable una disposición impresa sin cambiar el volumen, y el volumen no registra eso.
El texto siguiente es la ley tal como la imprime el estado, en inglés.
The superior courts shall have jurisdiction in all cases, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. They shall have exclusive jurisdiction over trials in felony cases, except in the case of juvenile offenders as provided by law; in cases respecting title to land; and in divorce cases. They shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the state-wide business court and the Georgia Tax Court in equity cases. A superior court by agreement of the parties may order removal of a case to the state-wide business court or the Georgia Tax Court as provided by law. The superior courts shall have such appellate jurisdiction, either alone or by circuit or district, as may be provided by law.
History
Ga. Const. 1983, Art. 6, § 4, Para. 1, Ga. L. 2018, p. 1130, § 1/HR 993; Ga. L. 2024, p. 1189, § 4/HR 598.
Editor's notes
The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 2018, p. 1130, § 1/HR 993), which revised this section, was ratified at the general election held on November 6, 2018. The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 2024, p. 1189, § 4/HR 598), which inserted “and the Georgia Tax Court” following “business court” in the third sentence, and inserted “or the Georgia Tax Court” following “business court” in the fourth sentence, was ratified at the general election held November 5, 2024.
Law reviews
For annual survey on trial practice and procedure, see 70 Mercer L. Rev. 253 (2018).
Otras notas
- claims between coin-operated amusement machine licensees.
- Superior court properly concluded that the company’s claims were within the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction because O.C.G.A. § 50-27-102(d) did not confer exclusive jurisdiction over claims between coin-operated amusement machine licensees to the Georgia Lottery Corporation (GLC); the General Assembly could have vested the GLC with exclusive jurisdiction, but it elected not to do so; and neither the legislature nor a judge could limit the jurisdiction of a superior court. Alli v. Ultra Group of Cos., Inc., 366 Ga. App. 670, 883 S.E.2d 888, 2023 Ga. App. LEXIS 57 (2023). Criminal Cases
- Jurisdiction proper.
- Because it was undisputed that the defendant’s crimes took place in Fulton County and that the defendant was tried in Fulton County, the defendant failed to demonstrate that the convictions were void for lack of jurisdiction or improper venue. Brown v. State, 346 Ga. App. 245, 816 S.E.2d 111, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS 360 (2018). Juvenile Cases
- Court lacked jurisdiction as defendant was juvenile when offenses committed.
- Superior court lacked jurisdiction to accept the defendant’s guilty pleas and enter the subsequent adjudications of guilt because the defendant was a juvenile at the time of the offenses. Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, LLP v. Gebo Law, LLC, 371 Ga. App. 341, 899 S.E.2d 244, 2024 Ga. App. LEXIS 153.
Leer la página oficial (el PDF del estado, abierto en la página de la que se leyó este texto).
Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
Texto leído de 2ga-const-(v2)-pdf.pdf, Volumen V2, edición 2016, suplemento de 2025, páginas 94 a 95; acción de fusión: replaced; SHA-256 del archivo 6dc4b5d1cb11.