Constitutionality.

- The 1983 Constitution carried forward power exclusively in the counties and municipalities from former constitutional provisions; the Outdoor Advertising Act, O.C.G.A. § 32-6-70, does not conflict with Ga. Const. 1983, Art. IX, Sec. II, Para. IV. Patrick v. Head, 262 Ga. 654, 424 S.E.2d 615 (1993).

Owner had to be in compliance with then-existing ordinance.

- Property owner did not have a vested right to erect a sign because the sign had not been erected in accordance with zoning regulations in force when the owner applied for the permit; accordingly, the owner's failure to comply with the permit rendered the owner outside of the scope of protection afforded by Ga. Const. 1983, Art. IX, Sec. II, Para. IV. Although the Outdoor Advertising Control Act, O.C.G.A. § 32-6-70, also afforded protections, such protection was again not applicable to the property owner because the owner had not erected the owner's sign in compliance with the legal requirements of the existing ordinances; accordingly, the owner had no property rights in the sign. DeKalb County v. DRS Invs., Inc., 260 Ga. App. 225, 581 S.E.2d 573 (2003).

Outdoor advertising.

- O.C.G.A. § 32-6-70, in no uncertain terms, delegated the regulation of outdoor advertising to the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT) as the statute provided in part that it was the intention of the General Assembly to provide a statutory basis for the regulation of outdoor advertising, such basis to be consistent with the public policy relating to areas adjacent to roads of the state highway system, under § 32-6-70(a), and O.C.G.A. § 32-6-90 further authorized the DOT to promulgate regulations governing permits for outdoor advertising. Walker v. DOT, 279 Ga. App. 287, 630 S.E.2d 878 (2006).

Signs inside the building.

- After a company installed three signs inside the windows of a building, the superior court erred in concluding that the Georgia Outdoor Advertising Control Act (OACA), O.C.G.A. § 32-6-70 et seq., regulated the company's signs because the OACA regulated outdoor signs, and it was undisputed that the company's signs were located inside the building, and the signs could not be characterized as outdoor signs. Monumedia II, LLC v. DOT, 343 Ga. App. 49, 806 S.E.2d 215 (2017).

Cited in Moreton Rolleston, Jr. Living Trust v. DOT, 242 Ga. App. 835, 531 S.E.2d 719 (2000); Fulton County v. Action Outdoor Adver., JV, LLC, 289 Ga. 347, 711 S.E.2d 682 (2011).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 3 Am. Jur. 2d, Advertising, §§ 2, 6, 22, 23. 40 Am. Jur. 2d, Highways, Streets, and Bridges, § 324.

Outdoor Advertising Sign or Billboard as Nuisance, 37 POF2d 141.

ALR.

- Nature and extent of right granted by contract for use of wall or roof for advertising purposes, 10 A.L.R. 1108; 119 A.L.R. 1523.

Advertising rights on leased premises, 22 A.L.R. 800; 20 A.L.R.2d 940.

Constitutional power to regulate outdoor and street car advertising, 79 A.L.R. 551.

Power of highway officer in respect of billboards or other conditions on adjoining property which are deemed dangerous to travel or offensive esthetically to travelers, 81 A.L.R. 1547.

Validity and construction of statute or ordinance relating to distribution of advertising matter, 114 A.L.R. 1446.

Validity and construction of state or local regulation prohibiting the erection or maintenance of advertising structures within a specified distance of street or highway, 81 A.L.R.3d 564.