Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The purpose of this title is to provide a code of statutes for the public roads and other transportation facilities of the state, the counties, and municipalities of Georgia. The legislative intent is to provide an effective legal basis for the organization, administration, and operation of an efficient, modern system of public roads and other modes of transportation.
(Code 1933, § 95A-102, enacted by Ga. L. 1973, p. 947, § 1.)
Purpose of the Georgia Code of Public Transportation is organization, administration, and operation of an efficient, modern system of public roads as between the state, counties, and municipalities; the statute's purpose is not to ascertain and fix the status of the public right of use of every road in Georgia. Jordan v. Way, 235 Ga. 496, 220 S.E.2d 258 (1975) (see O.C.G.A. T. 32).
- Although ground had not been broken on a proposed interchange as of the date an applicant submitted applications for permits for outdoor advertising signs, the Georgia Department of Transportation's denial of the applications comported with O.C.G.A. §§ 32-1-2,32-6-74(a), and32-6-75(a)(18) because the interchange project had progressed to a point such that it constituted an interchange for purposes of § 32-6-75(a)(18) and the proposed sign locations were within the 500-foot blocked out zone established by § 32-6-75(a)(18). Eagle West, LLC v. Ga. DOT, 312 Ga. App. 882, 720 S.E.2d 317 (2011).
- Because an accident occurred on a county-owned road and did not occur on a part of the state highway system upon which the DOT owed a duty to motorists, and the couple's expert's affidavit could not establish a legal duty to erect signs or to take other steps to inform drivers of the closure of the county-owned road, summary judgment for the DOT was proper. Diamond v. DOT, 326 Ga. App. 189, 756 S.E.2d 277 (2014).
- Trial court erred by granting mandamus relief under O.C.G.A. § 9-6-20 with regard to a property owner seeking to compel a county to maintain roads in a subdivision because while the county had accepted dedication of the streets, the county still was vested with the discretion to decide whether to open all of the roads or close any of the roads, and the trial court was required to determine whether the county's decisions were arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable or a gross abuse of discretion as nowhere in the judgment was that standard articulated. Burke County v. Askin, 291 Ga. 697, 732 S.E.2d 416 (2012).
Cited in Fulton County v. Davidson, 253 Ga. 734, 325 S.E.2d 135 (1985); CSX Transp., Inc. v. Trism Specialized Carriers, Inc., 9 F. Supp. 2d 1374 (N.D. Ga. 1998); Evans Timber Co. v. Central of Ga. R.R., 239 Ga. App. 262, 519 S.E.2d 706 (1999).
- Power to limit weight of vehicle or its load with respect to use of streets or highways, 75 A.L.R.2d 376.
Warning: 'results' key not found in API response
No results found for Georgia Code 32-1-2.