Effect of petition.

- Petition is not mere pleading but instrument which passes title when filed and just and adequate compensation is paid into the court under O.C.G.A. § 32-3-7. Dorsey v. DOT, 248 Ga. 34, 279 S.E.2d 707 (1981).

Standing.

- Temporary administratrix, who was also the wife of the decedent landowner, had standing as a party to the action for the recovery of just compensation for land taken by the Department of Transportation in a condemnation proceeding. DOT v. Foster, 262 Ga. App. 524, 586 S.E.2d 64 (2003).

Open Records Law.

- "Property has been acquired" for purposes of the Open Records Law, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., exemption only after condemnation proceedings, including any litigation, have been completed. Black v. Georgia DOT, 262 Ga. 342, 417 S.E.2d 655 (1992).

Effect of omission of commencement date.

- Department of Transportation's omission of the commencement date of the temporary construction easement the department sought to condemn did not render the declaration of taking invalid; as a matter of law, the commencement date for the temporary construction easement is the date of the taking. Habersham Downs Homeowners' Ass'n v. DOT, 212 Ga. App. 686, 442 S.E.2d 868 (1994).

Nonconforming declaration of taking cannot vest title in condemnor.

- Declaration of taking which does not conform to the dictates of O.C.G.A. § 32-3-7 cannot vest title to the land in the condemnor. Dorsey v. DOT, 248 Ga. 34, 279 S.E.2d 707 (1981).

Vesting of title by amended declaration.

- Amended declaration can only vest title in condemnor at time of amendment, and does not relate vesting back to the time of the original declaration. Dorsey v. DOT, 248 Ga. 34, 279 S.E.2d 707 (1981).

Amendment to justification of just and adequate compensation.

- Along with amendment to declaration, amendment to justification of just and adequate compensation should be filed by condemnor. Dorsey v. DOT, 248 Ga. 34, 279 S.E.2d 707 (1981).

Date of taking for determining land value or consequential damages.

- For the purpose of determining the value of the land taken or consequential damages to land not taken, the condemnee shall have the right to elect whether the date of taking is the date of the filing of the original declaration of taking or the date of the filing of the amendment. Dorsey v. DOT, 248 Ga. 34, 279 S.E.2d 707 (1981).

Condemnee has no vested right in attorney fees granted by court.

- Party in condemnation proceeding acquired no vested right in the attorney fees awarded to the party through the judgment of the trial court. DOT v. Kendricks, 244 Ga. 613, 261 S.E.2d 391 (1979).

Trial court does not have authority, under O.C.G.A. § 32-3-7, to require payment of reasonable and necessary attorney fees and expenses of litigation for proceedings before an appellate court of this state. DOT v. Franco's Pizza & Delicatessen, Inc., 200 Ga. App. 723, 409 S.E.2d 281, cert. denied, 200 Ga. App. 895, 409 S.E.2d 281 (1991), overruled on other grounds, 264 Ga. 393, 444 S.E.2d 734 (1994).

Condemnation not required when no prior right of access.

- Condemnor creating a limited access highway need not condemn a purported "right of access" where none has previously existed. DOT v. Hardin, 231 Ga. 359, 201 S.E.2d 441 (1973) (decided under former Ga. L. 1955, p. 559).

Cited in DOT v. Lurie, 138 Ga. App. 9, 225 S.E.2d 687 (1976); Coffee v. Atkinson County, 236 Ga. 248, 223 S.E.2d 648 (1976); Morgan v. Department of Transp., 239 Ga. 560, 238 S.E.2d 95 (1977); DOT v. Worley, 150 Ga. App. 768, 258 S.E.2d 595 (1979); DOT v. Harrison, 154 Ga. App. 118, 267 S.E.2d 651 (1980); Blonder v. Department of Transp., 156 Ga. App. 711, 275 S.E.2d 762 (1980); DOT v. Delta Mach. Prods. Co., 162 Ga. App. 252, 291 S.E.2d 104 (1982); Stephens v. Department of Transp., 170 Ga. App. 784, 318 S.E.2d 167 (1984).

Right to interest in condemnation proceeding.

- Right to receive interest as part of just and adequate compensation vests on date of taking, which is the day the declaration of taking, accompanied by the payment of just and adequate compensation, is filed in a superior court. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-100.

Surplus property, not to be placed in court registry.

- Legislature intended that only money, and not surplus property, be placed into the court registry for satisfaction of any judgment resulting from a condemnation action. 1992 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 92-8.

ALR.

- Constitutionality of statute or ordinance denying right of property owners to defeat a proposed street improvement by protest, 52 A.L.R. 883.