306 Ga. 698
Ga.2019Background
- Linda S. Cowen, a Clayton County State Court judge since 1995, sued the county and its commissioners seeking over $120,000 in back pay (mandamus) for alleged underpayment from 2007–2017.
- Cowen alleged the county misapplied Local Law 2006 (setting a base salary with a 1.5% yearly multiplier) and County Ordinance 30-4 (a supplemental/alternative compensation scheme) in computing her pay.
- The county repealed the Supplemental Ordinance effective December 20, 2016; Cowen contended that repeal and prior calculations unlawfully reduced her compensation in violation of Ga. Const. art. VI, § VII, para. V (salary not to be decreased during term).
- Trial court dismissed: (1) all claims as barred by gross laches; (2) mandamus improper to recover back pay; and (3) merits against Cowen.
- Supreme Court held some claims were time-barred under the 2-year statute for wage recovery (OCGA § 9-3-22), concluded mandamus was an available remedy for timely claims, but affirmed denial of mandamus on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Cowen) | Defendant's Argument (Clayton County) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Cowen's mandamus claims were barred by laches/gross laches | Delay in filing until Oct. 6, 2017 should not bar recovery for the full period | Delay barred claims as untimely and equitable relief inappropriate | Claims accruing before Oct. 6, 2015 are time-barred by OCGA § 9-3-22; claims on/after Oct. 6, 2015 may proceed (trial court erred to bar all claims by laches) |
| Whether mandamus is an appropriate remedy to recover alleged back pay | Mandamus may compel payment of compensation unlawfully withheld | Mandamus improper because it would "undo" completed acts rather than compel future action | Mandamus is a permissible remedy to recover compensation due from one public official to another; trial court erred to the extent it rejected mandamus categorically |
| Whether county computed Cowen’s pay correctly under Local Law and Ordinance 30-4 | The Supplemental Ordinance should be treated as a "supplement" that feeds into Local Law calculations, entitling Cowen to larger pay | Ordinance 30-4 provides an alternative method; pay is the greater of Local Law calculation or the Ordinance cap (up to 95% of superior court judges) | The ordinances are read plainly: they provide alternative calculations and Cowen was paid the greater amount each year in dispute (2015–2017) |
| Whether a decrease from 2016 to 2017 violated the constitutional protection against salary decrease during an incumbent's term | Repeal of supplemental ordinance and resulting 2017 pay reduction violated Ga. Const. art. VI, § VII, para. V | Any reduction occurred between terms (term ended Dec. 31, 2016); constitutional protection applies only during a judge’s term | No constitutional violation: Cowen’s term ended Dec. 31, 2016; decrease took effect in new term (Jan. 1, 2017), so no relief under mandamus |
Key Cases Cited
- Marsh v. Clarke County School Dist., 292 Ga. 28 (mandamus is quasi-equitable and may be barred by gross laches)
- City of Atlanta v. Adams, 256 Ga. 620 (two-year statute for wage recovery applies to municipal pay disputes)
- Lee v. Peach County Bd. of Commrs., 269 Ga. 380 (mandamus may compel payment of compensation due between public officials)
- Best v. Maddox, 185 Ga. 78 (same: mandamus to recover compensation between public officials)
- Chatham County v. Massey, 299 Ga. 595 (mandamus principles for public duties and pay disputes)
- Fein v. Bessen, 300 Ga. 25 (mandamus is extraordinary; requires clear legal right or gross abuse)
- Bland Farms, LLC v. Ga. Dept. of Agriculture, 281 Ga. 192 (mandamus enforces duties that arise by law)
- Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170 (statutory interpretation—plain meaning governs)
- Major v. State, 301 Ga. 147 (application of statutory-construction principles)
- Heiskell v. Roberts, 295 Ga. 795 (interpretation of "term of office" and salary-protection principles)