Walker v. Duncan, 223 S.E.2d 675 (Ga. 1976). · Go Syfert
Search
Walker v. Duncan, 223 S.E.2d 675 (Ga. 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“it is well- established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use.”
102 citation events (56 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: WS CE RESORT OWNER, LLC v. HOLLAND (ga, 2023-02-21)
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1977 2001 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 20 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) WS CE RESORT OWNER, LLC v. HOLLAND (6×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
Ga. · 2023 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high
it is well- established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Eardley v. McGreevy (2×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
Ga. · 2005 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
t is well established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use
discussed Cited as authority (rule) JOHN W. TUCKER v. BRANNEN LAKE EAST, LLC (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
Generally speaking, an easement is “an interest in land owned and possessed by another.”3 And Georgia law has long recognized that when a developer “conveys lots with reference to a subdivision plat, the grantees may receive easements in certain features—mostly streets and parks—that are designated on the plat.”4 Indeed, for a small category of features, “designating them appropriately on the subdivision plat is enough, absent contrary evidence based in the plat or deed, to demonstrate clear 3 WS CE Resort Owner, LLC v. Holland, 315 Ga. 691 , 694 (2) (a) ( 884 SE2d 282 ) (2023); …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Marina Lane, LLC v. Camp Cherokee, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Marina Lane nevertheless argues that it acquired an irrevocable implied easement for lake access since Camp Cherokee had sold the subdivision lots pursuant to a recorded subdivision plat that showed the lake and since had been a newspaper advertisement for an auction sale of residence and business lots at the lake with a representation that “[e]ach lot will carry [b]oating, [s]wimming and [f]ishing [p]rivilege.” In this regard, Marina Lane relies upon the legal principles set forth in Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976), stating that 6 [i]t is well-established that w…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Camp Cherokee, Inc. v. Marina Lane, LLC
Ga. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Marina Lane nevertheless argues that it acquired an irrevocable implied easement for lake access since Camp Cherokee had sold the subdivision lots pursuant to a recorded subdivision plat that showed the lake and there since had been a newspaper advertisement for an auction sale of residence and business lots at the lake with a representation that “[e]ach lot will carry [b]oating, [s]wim-ming and [fjishing [privilege.” In this regard, Marina Lane relies upon the legal principles set forth in Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976), stating that [i]t is well-established th…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Peck v. LANIER GOLF CLUB, INC.
Ga. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
See Forsyth County v. Martin, 279 Ga. 215, 217 (1) ( 610 SE2d 512 ) (2005); Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976); Patterson v. Powell, 257 Ga. App. 336, 337-339 ( 571 SE2d 400 ) (2002).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bolinger v. Neal
Colo. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Thus, where "a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use." Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331 , 223 S.E.2d 675, 676 (1976); see Immanuel Baptist Church v. Barnes, 274 S.C. 125 , 264 S.E.2d 142, 144 (1980) ("When the owner of a tract of land lays it out in streets and lots on a plat and sells those lots by deeds referring to the plat, normally the legal effect is the creation and conveyance of private easements in the streets to the grantees."); Murrells Inlet Corp. v. Ward, 378 S.C. 225 , 662 S.E.2d 452, 455-56 (App.2008…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Peck v. Lanier Golf Club, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
See Forsyth County v. Martin, 279 Ga. 215, 217 (1) ( 610 SE2d 512 ) (2005); Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976); Patterson v. Powell, 257 Ga. App. 336, 337-339 ( 571 SE2d 400 ) (2002).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Danbert v. North Georgia Land Ventures, LLC
Ga. · 2010 · confidence medium
Similarly an express or implied dedication as contemplated in 1845 La Dawn Lane, supra, does not appear to be required under the Regulations, as the County’s definition of “street” embraces “public or dedicated thoroughfare,” evidencing an intent that “public” mean something other than “dedicated.” See footnote 4, supra. See also Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 333 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976) (recording of a subdivision plat acts as the grant of an easement to the purchasers of the property, but also raises a presumption of intent to dedicate to the public).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Dillard v. Bishop Eddie Long Ministries, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 2002 · confidence medium
Pimper Group, 248 Ga. App. 265, 266-267 ( 546 SE2d 37 ) (2001). 6 (Footnote omitted.) Id. at 267 . 7 See Ebon Foundation v. Oatman, 269 Ga. 340, 344 (3) (b) ( 498 SE2d 728 ) (1998). 8 (Punctuation omitted.) Higgins v. Odom, 246 Ga. 309 -310 ( 271 SE2d 211 ) (1980). 9 Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976). 10 See id. 11 See Brown v. Tomlinson, 246 Ga. 513, 514 ( 272 SE2d 258 ) (1980) (in certain instances, it would be unfair to allow drainage of a lake that had existed for over 20 years). 12 See Kiwanis Club Foundation v. Yost, 179 Neb. 598 ( 139 NW2d 359 ) (1966) (where da…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Northpark Associates No. 2, Ltd. v. Homart Development Co. (2×)
Ga. · 1992 · confidence medium
Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976); Westbrook v. Comer, 197 Ga. 433, 439 ( 29 SE2d 574 ) (1944).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Smith v. Gwinnett County
Ga. · 1982 · confidence medium
The rationale is that the grantees of the property have given consideration for its enhanced value in the increased price of their lots. [Cits.]’.’ Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Of the Estate of Seamans v. True
Ga. · 1981 · confidence medium
Regarding implied easements, see, Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976); Stanfield v. Brewton, 228 Ga. 92 ( 184 SE2d 352 ) (1971).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Smith v. Bruce (3×) also: Cited "see"
Ga. · 1978 · confidence medium
As we said in Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ), "It is well-established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in areas set apart for their use.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Doughtie v. Dennisson
Ga. · 1977 · confidence medium
As we said in Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976): "It is well-established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use.
discussed Cited "see" Davis v. Foreman (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gold Creek SL, LLC v. City of Dawsonville, 290 Ga. App. 807, 813 (2), n. 4 ( 660 SE2d 858 ) (2008). 9 Fuller v. Greenville Banking Co., 230 Ga. App. 63, 65 (2) ( 495 SE2d 320 ) (1997). 10 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Continental Corp. v. Dept. of Transp., 185 Ga. App. 792, 793 (1) ( 366 SE2d 160 ) (1988). 11 Hook v. Bergen, 286 Ga. App. 258, 261 (1) ( 649 SE2d 313 ) (2007). 12 (Citation omitted.) Henderson v. Justice, 237 Ga. App. 284, 287 (1) ( 514 SE2d 713 ) (1999). 13 (Citation omitted.) Id. 14 See OCGA § 9-11-56 (h). 15 (Citation omitted.) Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 2…
discussed Cited "see" Savannah Jaycees Foundation, Inc. v. Gottlieb (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord East Beach Properties v. Taylor, 250 Ga. App. 798, 801 (2) ( 552 SE2d 103 ) (2001). 14 See Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332-333 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976) (recording of a subdivision plat acts as the grant of an easement to the purchasers of the property, but also raises a presumption of intent to dedicate to the public). 15 This provision applies only if “a person sells a house and the light necessary for the reasonable enjoyment thereof is derived from and across adjoining land belonging to such person, the easement of light and air over such vacant lot shall pass as an incident to t…
discussed Cited "see" Patterson v. Powell (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
III (1); see Henderson v. Easters, 178 Ga. App. 867, 869 (1) ( 345 SE2d 42 ) (1986). 2 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976). 3 (Citations omitted.) Id.; see Smith v. Bruce, 241 Ga. 133, 144 (2) ( 244 SE2d 559 ) (1978). 4 246 Ga. 309, 310 ( 271 SE2d 211 ) (1980). 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 240 Ga. 299 ( 240 SE2d 89 ) (1977). 8 Id. at 300 . 9 Id. 10 253 Ga. 549 ( 322 SE2d 494 ) (1984). 11 See Smith v. Clay, 239 Ga. 220, 221 ( 236 SE2d 346 ) (1977) (developer, as a matter of law, created easements for owners to use a road where he recorded a subdivision plat showing such road and sold lots pursuant to the…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." De Castro v. Durrell (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331, 332 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976) (plat showed named park); Stanfield v. Brewton, 228 Ga. 92, 94-95 (1) (a) ( 184 SE2d 352 ) (1971) (plat showed public park); Bishop Eddie Long Ministries v. Dillard, 272 Ga. App. 894, 898 (1) ( 613 SE2d 673 ) (2005) (landowner who purchased from a developer pursuant to a subdivision plat showing a lake owned by the developer acquired an easement to the lake, with which neither the developer nor the lake’s subsequent owner could interfere); Patterson v. Powell, 257 Ga. App. 336, 337 ( 571 SE2d 400 ) (2002) (easement rights to…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hand v. Pettitt (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
When the grantor records a subdivision plat with streets, the grantor creates an express easement and the grantor “as a matter of law created such easements in favor of the property owners in the subdivision, and a jury was not authorized to find otherwise. [Cit.]” Smith v. Clay, 239 Ga. 220, 221 ( 236 SE2d 346 ) (1977); see also Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331 ( 223 SE2d 675 ) (1976).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WALKER
v.
DUNCAN Et Al.
30720.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Feb 11, 1976.
223 S.E.2d 675
Byrd, Groover & Buford, Denmark Groover, Jr., Walker, Clarke, McConnell, Richardson & Moore, L. A. McConnell, Jr., for appellant., Adams, O’Neal, Hemingway, Kaplan, Stone & Brown, H. T. O’Neal, Jr., Manley F. Brown, James, Shipp & Wilcox, T. D. Wilcox, for appellees.
Hall.
Cited by 39 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 89%
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Georgia (1)
Hall, Justice.

Owners of lots in a subdivision located near a lake sought to enjoin the developer of the subdivision from building a club and condominiums around the lake. The trial court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff landowners, and the developer appeals. We affirm. When a developer sells lots according to a subdivision plat, which has a lake area designated on it, the purchasers acquire an irrevocable easement in that park, with which the developer may not interfere.

When Homer Walker, Sr. died in 1947 his land was divided equally among his widow and two sons. They drew and recorded a subdivision plat, but in 1955, they recorded a resubdivision of the original plat. Lots were then sold referring to the newer plat, which included several streets and the lake area designated Tommy Walker Memorial Park.

In 1974, the developer built a large shed, since destroyed by fire, on the northern portion of the lake, and filed a request to rezone the southern half of the lake for condominiums. The subdivision owners notified the developer of their dissatisfaction with the plans, and of their intention to protect their rights. Thereafter, they filed their complaint to enjoin any actions by the developer interfering with their rights in the southern portion of the lake and park as shown on the subdivision plat. They later amended their petition seeking to enjoin[*332] the development of the northern portion of the lake area also.

The partial summary judgment granted to the lot owners enjoins the developer from any interference with the rights of the lot owners in the southern portion of the park. It is only this judgment that is now before us on appeal.

It is well-established that where a developer sells lots according to a recorded plat, the grantees acquire an easement in any areas set apart for their use. Tietjen v. Meldrim, 169 Ga. 678 (151 SE 349) (1929). An easement acquired in this manner is considered an express grant, and is an irrevocable property right. The rationale is that the grantees of the property have given consideration for its enhanced value in the increased price of their lots. Stanfield v. Brewton, 228 Ga. 92 (184 SE2d 353) (1971); East Atlanta Land Co. v. Mower, 138 Ga. 380 (75 SE 418) (1912).

The developer of the Walker Park Subdivision in laying out the lots set apart certain areas for streets and another area, which included the southern part of the lake, labelled Tommy Walker Memorial Park. The property owners were enticed into purchasing their lots, and presumably paid a greater price for them, by the implied promise of the developer to preserve this lake area as a park. Thus, we hold that the developer had granted an easement to use Tommy Walker Memorial Park to the property owners, and the trial court properly enjoined any interference with that right by the developer, as a matter of law.

We note also that the parties below had addressed this issue in terms of dedication to the public. It is true that the recording of a subdivision plat not only acts as the grant of an easement to the purchasers of the property, but also raises a presumption of intent to dedicate to the public. Ross v. Hall County Board of Commissioners, 235 Ga. 309 (219 SE2d 380) (1975); Carroll v. DeKalb County, 216 Ga. 663 (119 SE2d 258) (1961); Savannah Beach, Tybee Island v. Drane, 205 Ga. 14 (52 SE2d 439) (1949). However, we need not reach this issue here. Since it is the property owners who seek to enjoin the developer, the questions of dedication to, and acceptance by, the[*333] public do not arise.

Argued January 14, 1976 Decided February 11, 1976 Rehearing denied February 24,1976. Byrd, Groover & Buford, Denmark Groover, Jr., Walker, Clarke, McConnell, Richardson & Moore, L. A. McConnell, Jr., for appellant. Adams, O’Neal, Hemingway, Kaplan, Stone & Brown, H. T. O’Neal, Jr., Manley F. Brown, James, Shipp & Wilcox, T. D. Wilcox, for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.