O.C.G.A. § 22-2-139 (2019)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Court has power to enjoin condemnor from taking possession of and entering upon land until the issues made by the petition and defensive pleadings have been determined. Mitchell v. State Hwy. Dep’t, 216 Ga. 517, 118 S.E.2d 88 (1961). Citizens and taxpayers may seek to prevent illegal disposition of county property. - Citizens and taxpayers of a county have such an interest in county property as will authorize them to seek to prevent an illegal disposition thereof; and, in their efforts to do so, they may enlist the aid of equity to enjoin any such attempted disposition and to cancel deeds to and contracts of sale of county property by which such an illegal disposition of such property is sought to be effectuated. Timbs v. Straub, 216 Ga. 451, 117 S.E.2d 462 (1960). Separate action will not lie to enjoin condemnation. - Since adequate and complete relief, equitable as well as legal, was afforded any person aggrieved by a condemnation proceeding brought under former Code 1933, § 36-1104 et seq. (see O.C.G.A. § 22-2-130 et seq.) which permitted intervention by such person in the condemnation proceeding itself, a separate action in equity will not lie to enjoin the condemnation proceeding or to contest the constitutionality of the act under which condemnation was proceeding. Mitchell v. State Hwy. Dep’t, 216 Ga. 517, 118 S.E.2d 88 (1961). When condemnor pays award of assessors into registry of court, the con-

demnor is not thereafter concerned with its distribution. Kruetz v. Housing Auth., 107 Ga. App. 315, 130 S.E.2d 134 (1963). Service of notice upon executor who is also owner. - Although the plaintiff, in the plaintiff ’s capacity as executor, should have been served with notice of condemnation proceeding, the fact that the plaintiff was served as one of eight ‘‘owners’’ of the land with notice gave the plaintiff knowledge of the proceeding, and the plaintiff could have intervened as executor to protect the interests of the estate under the provision of this section, that anyone claiming any interests or rights in the subject property might intervene in the condemnation proceeding, the plaintiff was in no way harmed by reason of the condemnor’s failure to give the plaintiff official notice in the plaintiff ’s capacity as executor. Mitchell v. State Hwy. Dep’t, 216 Ga. 517, 118 S.E.2d 88 (1961). Fears of nuisance held too speculative to permit injunction. - Fears of abutting landowners that land condemned for use as a football stadium would become a nuisance were too speculative to permit the enjoining of the condemnation. Herren v. Board of Educ., 219 Ga. 431, 134 S.E.2d 6 (1963). City did make its interest known to the court when the city filed a motion for a rehearing on the award contending the city did not receive the requisite notice of the motion to disburse the condemnation award since the newly discovered deeds

showed the city had an interest in the property, and since the award and the motion prayed for an equitable division of the proceeds. Hart v. City of Hamilton, 173 Ga. App. 135, 325 S.E.2d 791 (1984). Cited in United States v. A Certain Tract or Parcel of Land, 47 F. Supp. 30 (S.D. Ga. 1942); Wilson v. State Hwy.

Dep’t, 85 Ga. App. 907, 70 S.E.2d 535 (1952); State Hwy. Dep’t v. Hendrix, 215 Ga. 821, 113 S.E.2d 761 (1960); State Hwy. Dep’t v. Taylor, 216 Ga. 90, 115 S.E.2d 188 (1960); Fourth Nat’l Bank v. Grant, 140 Ga. App. 78, 230 S.E.2d 60 (1976); Bankston v. City of Barnesville, 221 Ga. App. 446, 471 S.E.2d 543 (1996).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 27 Am. Jur. 2d, Eminent Domain, § 414. Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms. - 9A Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Eminent Domain, § 241 et seq.

C.J.S. - 29A C.J.S., Eminent Domain, § 255 et seq. ALR. - Right of adjoining landowners to intervene in condemnation proceedings on ground that they might suffer consequential damage, 61 A.L.R.2d 1292.