The Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission formerly the Georgia State Ethics Commission appeals from an order issued by the Fulton County Superior Court ruling that the expiration of the applicable statute of limitation barred the Commission’s preliminary investigation into whether reasonable grounds existed to believe that State Mutual Insurance Company and Admiral Life Insurance Company made contributions to an election campaign for public office in violation of the Ethics in Government Act the Act OCGA § 21-5-1 et seq.. For the reasons which follow, we find that the Court had no jurisdiction to issue the ruling because it was entered after a final order entered in the case at a prior term of the Court. Accordingly, the Court’s ruling on the statute of limitation was null and void and must be vacated.
This appeal arises from a preliminary investigation initiated by the Commission based on its finding of probable cause to investigate contributions made in 2008 by the above-stated insurance Companies to a political action committee which contributed to the campaign of former Georgia Insurance Commissioner, John Oxendine, for the office of Governor of Georgia. During the pendency of the Commission’s investigation into possible violations of the Act, the Companies filed a complaint on May 28, 2010, in the Fulton County Superior Court.1 The complaint sought a declaration that the Commission lacked authority under the Act to proceed with the preliminary investigation of the Companies, and sought temporary and permanent injunctive relief barring the Commission from proceeding with the investigation and barring the issuance of subpoenas pursuant to the Act in support of the investigation. After a hearing, the Court entered an order on July 16, 2010, captioned as its “Final Order” in favor of the Commission. With respect to the requested declaratory and injunctive relief barring the Commission’s investigation and subpoenas issued under the Act, the Court’s order denied temporary injunctive relief and further ruled that: “Having considered the pleadings, motions, arguments, the entire record and applicable law, the Court finds OCGA § 21-5-6 a 5 specifically vests in the State Ethics Commission the power to find probable cause to initiate hearings and similarly to issue subpoenas in connection with its investigation of possible violations.” The Court’s “Final Order” also included a statement that the Clerk of the Court was “ordered to reflect upon the record that this case is now ‘inactive’ and ‘disposed.’ “
