Ray Prince v. Charles Renaud

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 14, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A19I0126. RAY PRINCE et al. v. CHARLES RENAUD.

Grady County Commissioners Ray Prince, T. D. David, Lafaye Copeland, and Carlos Tobar (collectively, the “Defendants”) seek immediate review of the trial court’s order denying their motion to dismiss certain claims asserted in a second amended complaint filed by Plaintiff Charles Renaud. In the order, the trial court concluded, among other things, that the Plaintiff sufficiently alleged a prior restraint of his First Amendment right of access to a designated public forum, a right protected by the Free Speech, Assembly, and Petition Clauses of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction over “[a]ll cases involving the construction . . . of the Constitution of the State of Georgia or of the United States and all cases in which the constitutionality of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision has been called into question.” Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. II (1); see Atlanta Independent School System v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657, 657-658 (1) (469 SE2d 22) (1996). Because the Plaintiff’s complaint asserts a violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, it appears that jurisdiction over this application may lie in the Supreme Court, despite the fact that the application may ultimately be resolved on other grounds. See Harrison v. Wigington, 269 Ga. 388, 388 (497 SE2d 568) (1998) (“If a constitutional question is raised and ruled on below, [the Supreme] [C]ourt has exclusive appellate jurisdiction, and this is true, although upon a consideration of the entire case, [the Supreme] [C]ourt determines that a decision upon such constitutional questions is not necessary to a proper solution of the case, and makes no decision thereon.”) (citation and punctuation omitted).

As the Supreme Court has the ultimate responsibility for determining appellate jurisdiction, see Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med. Clinic, 267 Ga. 177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996), this application is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/14/2018 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.