Carter v. Burson
Carter v. Burson, 230 Ga. 511 (1973)
Winning Party
Carter et al.
Key Issue
Declaratory Judgment and Injunction Regarding the Abolition of the Office of State Treasurer
Case Type
CIVIL
Facts
•
The trial court ruled that the intention to abolish the office of State Treasurer was not clearly manifested by Senate Resolution 313.
•
The State Governmental Reorganization Program was instituted by the Governor and implemented by legislation passed in 1972.
•
The trial court initially issued a restraining order against advertising the constitutional amendment, which was later superseded by the Supreme Court.
•
The Executive Reorganization Act of 1972 transferred the functions of the State Treasurer to the fiscal division of the Department of Administrative Services.
•
William H. (Bill) Burson was the incumbent State Treasurer, elected for a 4-year term beginning January 1, 1971.
•
Senate Resolution 48 also proposed amendments to the Constitution, with references to the State Treasurer.
•
Burson filed a complaint seeking injunction and declaratory judgment against the implementation of these changes.
•
Senate Resolution 313 proposed an amendment to the Constitution to remove the Treasurer as an elected constitutional officer.
•
The constitutional amendments submitted by Senate Resolutions 313 and 48 were ratified at the general election held on November 7, 1972.
Explore this Case with AI
Ask about this case, find precedent, analyze legal issues, or draft provisions. Powered by all precedential U.S. cases (10M+)
No credit card required
Key Holdings
•
Senate Resolution 313 did not violate Art. XIII, Sec. I, Par. I of the Constitution because the various amendments submitted pursuant to that resolution related to and were germane to the end of deleting the name and office of State Treasurer from the Constitution.
•
The language of submission of the constitutional amendment proposed by Senate Resolution 313 was sufficient to inform the voters of the issue on which they were to vote.
•
The Executive Reorganization Act of 1972 did not violate the constitutional prohibition against acts referring to more than one subject matter because all parts of the Act were germane to the single subject matter of governmental reorganization.
•
The amendments proposed by Senate Resolution 313 clearly had the effect of abolishing the office of State Treasurer, and the trial court erred in holding otherwise.
Citations
Carter v. Burson, 230 Ga. 511, 198 S.E.2d 151 (1973)
Legal Reasoning
The court reasoned that the amendments proposed by Senate Resolution 313 clearly abolished the office of State Treasurer. The court also found that Senate Resolution 313 did not violate the constitutional requirement that amendments be submitted separately because all parts of the resolution were germane to the single objective of deleting the name and office of State Treasurer from the Constitution. Similarly, the court found that the Executive Reorganization Act of 1972 did not violate the constitutional prohibition against acts referring to more than one subject matter because all parts of the Act were germane to the single subject matter of governmental reorganization. Finally, the court held that the language of submission of the constitutional amendment was sufficient to inform the voters of the issue on which they were to vote.
Outcome
Judgment reversed on the main appeal; cross appeal affirmed.
Want to Learn More About StrongSuit?
StrongSuit has advanced legal AI tools for deep insights & comprehensive analysis
No credit card required
Copyright 2026 StrongSuit AI, Inc. | All Rights Reserved