O.C.G.A. § 22-2-108 (2019)

Annotations

The 1998 amendment, effective July 1, 1998, in the first sentence, inserted "appointed pursuant to Code Section 22-2-103" and substituted the proviso for "and his"; added "The special master's" at the beginning of the present second sentence; and inserted "by Code Section 22-2-108.1, relating to granting of a recess for selection of assessors, or" in the fourth sentence.

Law reviews. - For review of 1998 legislation relating to eminent domain, see 15 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 115 (1998).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Procedure satisfies due process. - Section 22-2-102 supplemented by § 22-2-107 and this section provides reasonable notice and opportunity for a condemnee to be heard and therefore satisfies the constitutional provisions as to due process. Kellett v. Fulton County, 215 Ga. 551, 111 S.E.2d 364 (1959).

Condemnee bound by decision to use special master. - Having chosen and agreed to use the special master proceeding, a condemnee is bound by the applicable law regarding the special master's proceeding. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth. v. Central Parking Sys., 167 Ga. App. 649, 307 S.E.2d 93 (1983).

Duty of special master. - The primary duty of the special master is to ascertain the value of the property sought to be condemned and the consequential damages or benefits, if any, with the authority to hear and determine any legal objections raised by the parties. Leach v. Georgia Power Co., 228 Ga. 16, 183 S.E.2d 755 (1971); Ward v. Housing Auth., 157 Ga. App. 825, 278 S.E.2d 715 (1981).

The primary duty of the special master is to ascertain the total amount in money that will be equivalent to "just and adequate compensation" for the property and the interests in property being taken by the condemnor. Zuber Lumber Co. v. City of Atlanta, 237 Ga. 358, 227 S.E.2d 362 (1976).

Issues to be resolved by special master. - All issues as to the right of the condemnor to condemn, the interest to be condemned, the nature of the interest taken, and the effect of the condemnation upon the respective rights of the parties are to be resolved by the special master. State Hwy. Dep't v. Thomas, 115 Ga. App. 372, 154 S.E.2d 812 (1967).

Legal objections raised by parties may include, for example, the right of the condemnor to condemn, the interest to be condemned, the nature of the interest taken and the effect of the condemnation upon the respective rights of the parties. Ward v. Housing Auth., 157 Ga. App. 825, 278 S.E.2d 715 (1981).

Exceptions to findings of special master required for review. - Where legal objections or issues are raised before and passed upon by the special master, to obtain a review in the pending condemnation case exceptions must be taken to the orders of the special master. Leach v. Georgia Power Co., 228 Ga. 16, 183 S.E.2d 755 (1975).

When legal objections are raised before and passed upon by the special master, to obtain review of these objections exceptions must be taken to the master's findings prior to the superior court's entry of an order and judgment condemning the property. Ward v. Housing Auth., 157 Ga. App. 825, 278 S.E.2d 715 (1981).

When no exceptions are taken to master's finding and it is made judgment of court, it is final until set aside or reversed in a manner provided by law. State Hwy. Dep't v. Thomas, 115 Ga. App. 372, 154 S.E.2d 812 (1967); Ward v. Housing Auth., 157 Ga. App. 825, 278 S.E.2d 715 (1981).

Statutory construction where procedural provisions incomplete. - Where wording is taken from a prior statute, or where this article fails to be complete within itself, then reference to provisions for proceedings before assessors is permitted to fill in the void. Johnson v. Fulton County, 103 Ga. App. 873, 121 S.E.2d 54 (1961).

Condemnee is not required to litigate tort claim as part of condemnation proceeding where special master was not empowered to hear such claim. Georgia Power Co. v. Johnson, 155 Ga. App. 862, 274 S.E.2d 17 (1980).

Continuance. - This Code section mandates that no continuance be granted in excess of five days and does not denominate one rule for condemnors and another rule for condemnees, so where the condemnor failed to abide by the clear language of the statutory method it elected to follow, and the record was clear that condemnees at no time acquiesced in or waived strict compliance with this Code section, the trial court erred by not declaring the hearing of the special master void for violation of this Code section. Wrege v. Cobb County, 186 Ga. App. 512, 367 S.E.2d 817, cert. denied, 186 Ga. App. 919, 367 S.E.2d 817 (1988).

The language in this section restricting the duration of continuances benefits the condemning authority by expediting the condemnation process. Wrege v. Cobb County, 186 Ga. App. 512, 367 S.E.2d 817, cert. denied, 186 Ga. App. 919, 367 S.E.2d 817 (1988).

Cited in Nodvin v. Georgia Power Co., 125 Ga. App. 821, 189 S.E.2d 118 (1972); Atlanta Whses., Inc. v. Housing Auth., 143 Ga. App. 588, 239 S.E.2d 387 (1977); Hendley v. Housing Auth., 160 Ga. App. 221, 286 S.E.2d 463 (1981); Ga. Transmission Corp. v. Barron, 255 Ga. App. 645, 566 S.E.2d 363 (2002).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

It is responsibility of special master to establish value of property condemned, and nothing more; his duty is to assess the value of the property taken or damaged, and also to assess the consequential damages and benefits to the property not taken. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-494.

Payment of city or county taxes is not proper element of damages in condemnation case. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-494.

Responsibility for payment of taxes on condemned property. - The payment of property taxes is a responsibility of the landowner only so long as he, in fact, owns the property. The property owner or condemnee would be responsible for payment of taxes up to the date of taking; after that time, the responsibility for the payment of these taxes would lie upon the condemning body, if in fact that body is an entity which would have the responsibility for payment of these taxes. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-494.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d. - 26 Am. Jur. 2d, Eminent Domain, §§ 151, 152. 27 Am. Jur. 2d, Eminent Domain, §§ 266-296, 310-320, 357-374, 419-442.

C.J.S. - 29A C.J.S., Eminent Domain, §§ 104-185, 271-275. 30 C.J.S., Eminent Domain, §§ 276-279, 296-304.

ALR. - Right to intervene in court review of zoning proceeding, 46 A.L.R.2d 1059.

Right of adjoining landowners to intervene in condemnation proceedings on ground that they might suffer consequential damage, 61 A.L.R.2d 1292.

Power of successor or substituted master or referee to render decision or enter judgment on testimony heard by predecessor, 70 A.L.R.3d 1079.