Time for appealing assessor's award.

- Since the Board of Assessors did not file and record their award, apparently on the belief that the parties had decided on their own what the just compensation was for the condemnor obtaining the right of way, the 10-day time period for filing an appeal to a jury from the time the award was filed never arose and the condemnee was not barred from filing an appeal to a jury. Morrison v. Derdziak, 255 Ga. App. 89, 564 S.E.2d 500 (2002).

Appeal entered after ten days from filing of award is properly dismissed. Edwards v. Savannah & S. Ry., 140 Ga. 761, 79 S.E. 841 (1913).

Appeal not filed within the ten-day period is not timely and the proper judgment is one of dismissal. City of Savannah Beach v. Thompson, 135 Ga. App. 63, 217 S.E.2d 304 (1975).

Petition for removal of condemnation proceedings must be filed within the time allowed for appeals. City of Toccoa v. Marchbanks, 261 F. 684 (N.D. Ga. 1919).

Appeal may be entered by appellant's attorney. Bibb Brick Co. v. Central of Ga. Ry., 151 Ga. 83, 105 S.E. 833 (1921).

No bond is necessary on appeal. Alderman v. Valdosta, M. &. W.R.R., 9 Ga. App. 526, 71 S.E. 931 (1911); Bibb Brick Co. v. Central of Ga. Ry., 151 Ga. 83, 105 S.E. 833 (1921).

But appeal may be entered by city giving bond to the clerk of superior court. Potts v. City of Atlanta, 140 Ga. 431, 79 S.E. 110 (1913).

Judge's duty to bring issue to trial.

- This section places the duty to bring the issue to trial squarely upon the judge; no burden is imposed on either party by the statute to insure that the case is timely tried. Lackey v. DeKalb County, 156 Ga. App. 309, 274 S.E.2d 705 (1980); Nodvin v. DeKalb County, 158 Ga. App. 819, 282 S.E.2d 410 (1981).

Appeal under this section is de novo investigation, and the defendant may file an appropriate defense thereto. Central Ga. Power Co. v. Cornwell, 139 Ga. 1, 76 S.E. 387, 1914A Ann. Cas. 880 (1912).

An appeal to the superior court from an award of assessors in a condemnation proceeding is a de novo investigation, if the assessors had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties. If the assessors do have such jurisdiction, the appeal will not be dismissed nor the case remanded, though the award be in fact a nullity. Livsey v. Walton County, 47 Ga. App. 211, 170 S.E. 268 (1933).

The appeal from an appraisers' award on condemnation proceedings under this section brings the matter de novo to the jury on matters of value of the property taken and amount of damage done. Tuggle v. De Kalb County, 101 Ga. App. 890, 115 S.E.2d 751 (1960).

An appeal from an award of assessors is a trial de novo on the question of compensation, and it is the function and duty of the jury to pass upon the issues independently of the award of the assessors. Chandler v. Alabama Power Co., 104 Ga. App. 521, 122 S.E.2d 317 (1961), rev'd on other grounds, 217 Ga. 550, 123 S.E.2d 767 (1962).

An appeal by either party entitles both parties to a de novo determination of the issue of the amount of a condemnee's award. Smith v. Georgia Power Co., 131 Ga. App. 380, 205 S.E.2d 916 (1974).

The only method of correcting any errors the assessors or a special master may have made in the original hearing and award is not by recommittal to that body but by an appeal in the superior court, which begins again the process of adjudication. City of Savannah Beach v. Thompson, 135 Ga. App. 63, 217 S.E.2d 304 (1975).

Only issue on appeal is amount of compensation to be paid.

- The issue on appeal cannot be broadened so as to raise questions other than those as to compensation. Atlantic Coast Line R.R. v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 120 Ga. 268, 48 S.E. 15, 1 Ann. Cas. 734 (1904); Atlanta Terra Cotta Co. v. Georgia Ry. & Elec. Co., 132 Ga. 537, 64 S.E. 563 (1909).

In condemnation proceedings the only issue before the assessors or a jury on appeal is the amount of compensation to be paid, and neither the assessors nor a jury can determine whether the condemnor is proceeding legally; the remedy of the landowners is to apply to a court of equity to enjoin the illegal proceedings. Garden Parks v. Fulton County, 88 Ga. App. 97, 76 S.E.2d 31 (1953).

The sole question to be passed upon by the assessors, or a jury in the superior court on appeal, is the amount of compensation to be paid. Whether the quantity of land sought to be taken is necessary and proper for the purpose for which it is sought is a question not involved in such a proceeding. Johnson v. Fulton County, 103 Ga. App. 873, 121 S.E.2d 54 (1961).

As a general rule the only issue before the jury relative to lands taken is its market value at the time of the taking. State Hwy. Dep't v. Howell, 119 Ga. App. 606, 168 S.E.2d 213 (1969).

While all relevant legal and equitable issues may be raised in an appeal from the assessors' award in a condemnation proceeding, the sole issue for the jury is value. All other issues, including the necessary fact finding, are for the determination of the court. DeKalb County v. Jackson-Atlantic Co., 123 Ga. App. 695, 182 S.E.2d 160 (1971).

An appeal to the superior court jury is on the issue of value and damages alone. City of Savannah Beach v. Thompson, 135 Ga. App. 63, 217 S.E.2d 304 (1975).

An appeal from an award of assessors is a trial de novo on the question of compensation, and it is the function and duty of the jury to pass upon the issues independently of the award of the assessors. DeKalb County v. Queen, 135 Ga. App. 307, 217 S.E.2d 624 (1975).

Form of verdict on appeal from award of appraisers is not prescribed by statute. Nalley Land & Inv. Co. v. State Hwy. Bd., 49 Ga. App. 258, 175 S.E. 269 (1934).

Award of jury shall be in money only, and no conditions can be attached thereto. Darien & W.R.R. v. McKay, 132 Ga. 672, 64 S.E. 785 (1909).

On appeal from the award of assessors in a statutory condemnation proceeding, the verdict should be for a given sum. State Hwy. Bd. v. Warthen, 54 Ga. App. 754, 189 S.E. 76 (1936).

Waiver of irregularities in proceedings.

- Where the parties agreed to waive irregularities in proceedings to condemn a railroad right of way, these are not open on appeal. Georgia G.R.R. v. Venable, 129 Ga. 341, 58 S.E. 864 (1907).

Interest should be included as part of jury's award, for the jury, in reaching a verdict, should consider separately the various elements in respect to which they hear testimony, and their verdict is properly rendered for one sum. State Hwy. Bd. v. Warthen, 54 Ga. App. 759, 189 S.E. 76 (1936).

Tender or payment of award is necessary before property may be taken or the work thereon commenced. Wilson v. State Hwy. Dep't, 85 Ga. App. 907, 70 S.E.2d 535 (1952).

Payment to court equivalent of payment to owner, not owner's acceptance.

- Payment into court is the equivalent of payment to the owner only insofar as the right to enter upon the property and prosecute the work under this section is concerned. It is not the equivalent of acceptance of the award by the owner nor of payment to him insofar as it affects his right to pursue his remedy in equity. Williams v. City of La Grange, 213 Ga. 241, 98 S.E.2d 617 (1957).

Procedure substantially the same for appeals from assessors' award and justice's court.

- Substantially the same procedure is provided in cases of appeal from an award of assessors in a condemnation proceeding to the superior court as is provided in cases of appeal from a justice's court to the superior court. State Hwy. Bd. v. Long, 61 Ga. App. 173, 6 S.E.2d 130 (1939).

Amendments and readjustments of petitions authorized on appeal.

- On the appeal from the award of the appraisers, it is the duty of the judge to cause an issue to be made, and that in itself authorizes amendments and readjustments of the petitions in so far as they do not disturb the actual property involved. Tuggle v. De Kalb County, 101 Ga. App. 890, 115 S.E.2d 751 (1960).

Including amendment of acreage description.

- Where land to be condemned is accurately described by metes and bounds but the acreage description is not completely accurate, the acreage description may be changed by amendment on appeal of the appraisers' award, and such change is no ground for dismissing the appeal. Tuggle v. De Kalb County, 101 Ga. App. 890, 115 S.E.2d 751 (1960).

Award of assessors is not proper evidence for consideration of jury on an appeal in a condemnation case. Chandler v. Alabama Power Co., 104 Ga. App. 521, 122 S.E.2d 317 (1961), rev'd on other grounds, 217 Ga. 550, 123 S.E.2d 767 (1962); DeKalb County v. Queen, 135 Ga. App. 307, 217 S.E.2d 624 (1975).

Except for purpose of impeaching appraiser's testimony.

- The award of the assessors may be admitted for the limited purpose of impeaching the testimony of one of the appraisers. DeKalb County v. Queen, 135 Ga. App. 307, 217 S.E.2d 624 (1975).

Withdrawal of appeal not allowed without consent of adverse party.

- Where an appeal is taken from an award of assessors to the superior court, the condemnor shall not be allowed to withdraw an appeal after it shall be entered, but by the consent of the adverse party. State Hwy. Bd. v. Long, 61 Ga. App. 173, 6 S.E.2d 130 (1939).

Section22-2-112 is copied verbatim from this section and consequently has the same meaning. Johnson v. Fulton County, 103 Ga. App. 873, 121 S.E.2d 54 (1961).

Section22-2-112 dealing with an appeal from the award of the special master, and this section dealing with appeals from awards of assessors in eminent domain cases, are in identical language and must be given the same meaning. City of Savannah Beach v. Thompson, 135 Ga. App. 63, 217 S.E.2d 304 (1975).

Appeal from award of arbitrators governed by Title 9. - Notwithstanding a provision in an agreement submitting issues to arbitration under Title 9, that the arbitrators should proceed "as in condemnation proceedings," and providing for an "appeal" from the award to the superior court, the award of the arbitrators was a statutory award, to be governed by Title 9, not this title. Georgia Power Co. v. Friar, 47 Ga. App. 675, 171 S.E. 210 (1933), aff'd, 179 Ga. 470, 175 S.E. 807 (1934).

Condemnee should be allowed to show rental income from property, not for the purpose of being compensated for lost future revenue, but for the purpose of showing the use and location as affecting the value of the property. DeKalb County v. Queen, 135 Ga. App. 307, 217 S.E.2d 624 (1975).

Where jury tries case upon appeals of both condemnor and condemnee, the trial is valid and binding, assuming that the appeal of the condemnor is invalid and alone would not give the court jurisdiction. Liberson v. City of Atlanta, 98 Ga. App. 255, 105 S.E.2d 376 (1958).

Liability for interest on difference between assessors' award and final judgment.

- Where the amount of the final judgment is less than the award made by the assessors, the condemnee is not liable for the payment of interest on the difference in the amount of the award and the judgment except from the date of the judgment. City of Atlanta v. Lunsford, 105 Ga. App. 247, 124 S.E.2d 493 (1962).

Where tenth day following assessor's award falls on Saturday and condemnee files appeal two days thereafter, the entry of a judgment on an assessor's award only two days after the award was filed is premature. McAllister v. City of Jonesboro, 151 Ga. App. 260, 259 S.E.2d 666 (1979).

In appeal from assessment after land has been condemned to establish new road which alters an existing road, the burden is upon the property owner, in order to establish any consequential damage which may have been sustained by him from a discontinuance of the old road, to show that the old road has been discontinued in the manner prescribed by law. Wellmaker v. Lamar County Advisory Bd., 43 Ga. App. 816, 160 S.E. 708 (1931).

Cited in Savannah, Fla. & W. Ry. v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 112 Ga. 941, 38 S.E. 353 (1901); Denham v. State Hwy. Bd., 52 Ga. App. 790, 184 S.E. 631 (1936); Stewart v. Board of Comm'rs, 66 Ga. App. 108, 17 S.E.2d 203 (1941); United States v. 340 Acres of Land, 54 F. Supp. 457 (S.D. Ga. 1944); State Hwy. Dep't v. Peavy, 77 Ga. App. 308, 48 S.E.2d 478 (1948); Hagans v. Excelsior Elec. Membership Corp., 207 Ga. 53, 60 S.E.2d 162 (1950); Wilson v. State Hwy. Dep't, 85 Ga. App. 907, 70 S.E.2d 535 (1952); Olliff v. Housing Auth., 89 Ga. App. 43, 78 S.E.2d 549 (1953); Murray v. State Hwy. Dep't, 103 Ga. App. 517, 120 S.E.2d 48 (1961); State Hwy. Dep't v. Hester, 112 Ga. App. 51, 143 S.E.2d 658 (1965); Adams v. Housing Auth., 117 Ga. App. 646, 161 S.E.2d 444 (1968); Hinton v. Georgia Power Co., 126 Ga. App. 416, 190 S.E.2d 811 (1972); Taylor v. Georgia Power Co., 129 Ga. App. 89, 198 S.E.2d 701 (1973); James v. Housing Auth., 233 Ga. 447, 211 S.E.2d 738 (1975); Martha K. Wayt Trust v. City of Cumming, 306 Ga. App. 790, 702 S.E.2d 915 (2010).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 4 Am. Jur. 2d, Appeal and Error, §§ 146, 188, 258. 27 Am. Jur. 2d, Eminent Domain, §§ 407, 408, 448, 468-472.

C.J.S.

- 30 C.J.S., Eminent Domain, §§ 276-291, 306-318, 343-372.

ALR.

- Provision for taking or retaining possession pending appeal in condemnation proceeding, 55 A.L.R. 201.

Right of court to reduce or increase award in condemnation and confirm it as reduced or increased, 61 A.L.R. 194.

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

Admissibility, in eminent domain proceeding, of evidence as to price paid for condemned real property during pendency of the proceeding, 55 A.L.R.2d 781.

Admissibility, in eminent domain proceeding, of evidence as to price paid for condemned real property on sale prior to the proceeding, 55 A.L.R.2d 791.

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

How to obtain jury trial in eminent domain: waiver, 12 A.L.R.3d 7.

Eminent domain: recovery of value of improvements made with knowledge of impending condemnation, 98 A.L.R.3d 504.