Skip to main content

A good. § 50-14-1(d), the newest county are safely provided bottom line wisdom concerning these issues


Because a consumer’s proposed dump wouldn’t be a public utility, but could be really-possessed, it wasn’t entitled to a written verification regarding zoning conformity that it could pursue your state enable to create a dump; and KГјba karД±sД± therefore, whenever in addition to the fact that the new state failed to violate the fresh arrangements of Discover Meetings Work significantly less than O. EarthResources, LLC v. Morgan State, 281 Ga. 396, 638 S.E.2d 325 (2006).


From inside the an action as a result of brand new purchases regarding property, the newest demonstration courtroom erred in the giving bottom line wisdom with the suppliers, in contrast to both O.An effective. §§ 44-5-62 and44-5-63, since the good floodwater detention easement burdened the house or property by permitting new impoundment of h2o in it to end flood or increased liquid runoff towards the almost every other assets found downstream and you may, while the river try certainly open and you can obvious, an equivalent couldn’t necessarily end up being told you of the easement; more over, an informative procedure stayed because problems and though the brand new buyers’ constructive see of the easement by cause of their recordation inside organizations of name would provide a compelling reason behind exempting the easement of process of promise action, O.An excellent. § 44-5-63 considering or even. McMurray v. Housworth, 282 Ga. 280, 638 S.E.2d 421 (2006).

Just like the number contained no evidence one a neighboring landowner’s ancestor for the interest, otherwise the representatives, utilized the road constantly for around 2 decades, the new predecessor didn’t acquire an exclusive method by the medicines and you can and that, the latest next-door neighbor lacked any personal way by the treatments over good landowner’s assets to clear timber and take away barbed-wire about road in the place of committing a good trespass; hence, the demonstration judge didn’t err for the giving the fresh new landowner summary wisdom as to what dilemma of trespass. Norton v. Holcomb, 285 Ga. 78, 646 S.Age.2d 94 (2007), cert. rejected, Zero. S07C1221, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 654 (Ga. 2007).

As the genuine situations off thing facts stayed regarding whether or not good lessee’s failure to help you set-aside a keen easement towards subject possessions at the the time the new lessee carried out a restorative quitclaim action are if you don’t unreasonable, foreclosing the latest condemnation action, limited summary wisdom to your lessee is unwarranted. Wright v. Brookshire, 286 Ga. 162, 648 S.Elizabeth.2d 485 (2007).

Pursuant to an explained efforts related to homes belonging to a surrounding landowner and you may a neighbors, the demonstration legal securely offered realization judgment and only new next-door neighbor because the statement subscribed the new next-door neighbor in order to rearrange their particular strengthening and you may vehicle parking places for as long as the latest easement try was able. Wilcox Holdings, Ltd. v. Hull, 290 Ga. 179, 659 S.E.2d 406 (2008).

As vocabulary away from an easement contract ranging from several adjacent commercial landowners was confusing, parol proof is actually admissible showing the fresh parties’ intent. Therefore, inquiries of fact stayed of intent, and work out realization judgment poor. McGuire Holdings, LLLP v. TSQ People, LLC, 290 Ga. 595, 660 S.Age.2d 397 (2008).

– In the a healthy between a few landowners to demand the fresh regards to an enthusiastic easement, if you are no error lead out-of your order striking particular affidavits from inside the help out-of the second landowner’s claim having compensation for its leveling functions, legitimate material reality situations precluded summation wisdom on this allege. After that, bottom line judgment is unwarranted from what issue of perhaps the next landowner is actually entitled to use an effective detention pool into the first landowner’s property. McGuire Holdings, LLLP v. TSQ Couples, LLC, 290 Ga. 595, 660 S.Elizabeth.2d 397 (2008).

– Appeal to the brand new premium judge throughout the probate court is topic so you’re able to mainly based methods to possess municipal tips, for this reason entitling a celebration so you can invoke the brand new summary wisdom techniques. Woodall v. Very first Nat’l Financial, 118 Ga. 440, 164 S.E.2d 361 (1968).