2025 Code of Georgia
Title 21 - Elections (Chs. 1 — 5)
Chapter 2 - Elections and Primaries Generally (Arts. 1 — 15)
Article 13 - Contested Elections and Primaries (§§ 21-2-520 — 21-2-529)
§ 21-2-520. Definitions
- As used in this article, the term:
(1) “Contestant” means any person or persons entitled under Code Section 21-2-521 to contest the result of any primary or election.
(2) “Defendant” means:
(A) The person whose nomination or election is contested;
(B) The person or persons whose eligibility to seek any nomination or office in a run-off primary or election is contested;
(C) The election superintendent or superintendents who conducted the contested primary or election; or
(D) The public officer who formally declared the number of votes for and against any question submitted to electors at an election.
History
Code 1933, § 34-1701, enacted by Ga. L. 1964, Ex. Sess., p. 26, § 1; Ga. L. 1987, p. 1050, § 1; Ga. L. 1998, p. 295, § 1.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Failure to name Board of Registration and Elections as a party. —In an election contest, the trial court did not err in denying an incumbent’s motion to dismiss a challenger’s lawsuit merely because that challenger failed to name the Board of Registration and Elections as the proper party defendant, as the failure to name the proper parties was an amendable defect, correctable by the parties or upon the court’s own motion. Brodie v. Champion, 281 Ga. 105, 636 S.E.2d 511, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 833 (2006).
Equitable remedy could not be greater than if rights not violated by referendum vote. —Equitable relief sought by the petitioners was denied because if the trial court had not erred, the referendum still would have passed and the petitioners would be part of the city; thus, the petitioners were asking the court to put them in a better position than they would be in if their rights had not been violated. Harris v. City of S. Fulton, 358 Ga. App. 788, 856 S.E.2d 361, 2021 Ga. App. LEXIS 132 (2021).
Dismissal of appeal. — Court dismissed a pro se challenger’s appeal from a decision holding that the results of a special election for county commissioner were valid, as the successful candidate had been serving as county commissioner for more than nine months, and the delay in consideration of the appeal was attributable to the challenger’s failure to utilize the applicable procedures of the Election Code, further exacerbated by the challenger’s request to submit additional briefing, delaying the trial court’s decision. Miller v. Hodge, 319 Ga. 543, 905 S.E.2d 562, 2024 Ga. LEXIS 173 (2024).
Research References & Practice Aids
Law reviews.For article, “State Constitutional Law: Developments in Georgia Election Law,” see 77 Mercer L. Rev. 109 (2025).
Hierarchy Notes:O.C.G.A. Title 21
O.C.G.A. Title 21, Ch. 2
O.C.G.A. Title 21, Ch. 2, Art. 13
