TITLE 32 HIGHWAYS, BRIDGES, AND FERRIES

Section 8. Relocation Assistance, 32-8-1 through 32-8-6.

ARTICLE 8 CONTROL OF JUNKYARDS

32-8-1. Relocation assistance in accordance with Uniform Act; real property acquisition.

As used in this chapter, the term "Uniform Act" means the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended by the Uniform Relocation Act Amendments of 1987, Title IV of Public Law 100-17. The department, as required by the Uniform Act:
1. Shall make or approve payments, in accordance with Section 210 of the Uniform Act, for relocation expenses and replacement housing expenses and shall provide relocation assistance advisory services outlined in Section 205 of the Uniform Act; and
2. Shall make or approve payments, in accordance with Section 305(2) of the Uniform Act, to any person, family, business, farm operation, or nonprofit organization whose real property has been acquired by the department or is subject to a condemnation proceeding brought by the department for any federal-aid project in the state, the costs of which are now or hereafter financed in whole or in part from federal funds allocated to the department:
  1. For expenses incident to the transfer of real property acquired by the department, prepayment of mortgage penalties, and a pro rata portion of real property taxes on real property acquired by the department;
  2. For litigation expenses actually incurred by the condemnee in any condemnation proceeding brought by the department if the final judgment is that the department cannot acquire the real property by condemnation or the condemnation proceeding is formally abandoned by the department; or
  3. For litigation expenses incurred by the plaintiff in any inverse condemnation proceeding brought against the department in which judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintiff.
In acquiring real property for any federal-aid project, the costs of which are financed in whole or in part from federal funds allocated to the department, the department shall be guided to the greatest extent practicable under state law by the land acquisition policies in Section 301 of the Uniform Act and the provisions of Section 302 of the Uniform Act.
Nothing contained in this Code section shall be construed as creating in any condemnation proceeding brought under the power of eminent domain any element of value or of damage.

(Ga. L. 1966, p. 588, § 1; Ga. L. 1969, p. 495, §§ 3, 6; Ga. L. 1972, p. 931, §§ 3-10; Code 1933, § 95A-623, enacted by Ga. L. 1973, p. 947, § 1; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 32; Ga. L. 1988, p. 1737, § 3.)

U.S. Code.

- The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, referred to in this Code section, is codified as 42 U.S.C. § 4601 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Department need not abide by federal prohibition of compensation for enhancement.

- By requiring the Department of Transportation to be guided by federal law "to the greatest extent practicable" in the department's condemnation procedures, subsection (b) of O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1 does not thereby require the department to abide by the federal law's prohibition of compensation for enhancement by reason of taking and does not affect the judiciary's power to determine what constitutes just and adequate compensation. DOT v. White, 173 Ga. App. 68, 325 S.E.2d 397 (1984).

Relocation expenses part of "just and adequate compensation."

- Enactment of O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1 does not alter the fact that relocation expenses, whether awarded judicially or administratively, are still a part of the "just and adequate compensation" guaranteed to condemnees under the Constitution. DOT v. Gibson, 251 Ga. 66, 303 S.E.2d 19 (1983).

Relocation expenses may be recovered by administrative proceeding.

- Under O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1, a condemnee whose property is being acquired for federally assisted highway projects may, but is not required to, seek payment of relocation expenses directly from the Department of Transportation in an administrative action. DOT v. Gibson, 251 Ga. 66, 303 S.E.2d 19 (1983).

Relocation expenses may be recovered in condemnation proceeding.

- When the case does not involve payments under O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1, the condemnee would be able to litigate the question of the condemnee's business relocation expenses as an element of "just and adequate compensation" in the condemnation proceedings under O.C.G.A. § 32-3-1 et seq. DOT v. Gibson, 251 Ga. 66, 303 S.E.2d 19 (1983).

Seeking administrative payment of relocation expenses precludes a separate judicial determination of the same relocation expenses in the statutorily authorized condemnation proceedings. DOT v. Gibson, 251 Ga. 66, 303 S.E.2d 19 (1983).

Appeal of relocation expenses award under the Administrative Procedure Act.

- If a condemnee is dissatisfied with an award of relocation expenses under O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1, the award may be appealed under the Administrative Procedure Act, O.C.G.A. Ch. 13, T. 50. DOT v. Gibson, 251 Ga. 66, 303 S.E.2d 19 (1983).

Attorney fees.

- O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1 provides a remedy to recover attorney fees separate and apart from a condemnation proceeding where just and adequate compensation is at issue. DOT v. B & G Realty, Inc., 197 Ga. App. 613, 398 S.E.2d 762 (1990).

Cited in DOT v. Doss, 238 Ga. 480, 233 S.E.2d 144 (1977); DOT v. Rushing, 143 Ga. App. 235, 237 S.E.2d 722 (1977).

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 32-8-1

Total Results: 2 | Sort by: Relevance | Newest First

Copy

Dep't of Transp. v. Gibson, 303 S.E.2d 19 (Ga. 1983).

Cited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 25, 1983 | 251 Ga. 66

...ith the federally assisted project to widen Interstate 75 in Atlanta. Gibson Litho-Plate Co., Inc., solely owned by Gibson, operated its business on this property. Appellant provided Gibson with business relocation assistance in accordance with OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...oceedings), Gibson also sought relocation expenses as an element of just and adequate compensation. Appellant moved in limine to exclude all evidence of relocation expenses during the jury trial on the grounds that *67 relocation benefits under OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...'s application for interlocutory review of this ruling in order to consider the questions presented therein. 1. Initially, this case requires us to examine the relationship between business relocation assistance for condemnees as provided under OCGA § 32-8-1 et seq....

...Under our version of the Uniform Act, a condemnee whose property is being acquired for federally assisted highway projects may, but is not required to, seek payment of relocation expenses directly from the Department of Transportation in an administrative action. OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...*68 Prior to the enactment of the Uniform Act, we had held that business relocation expenses of the type involved here may be recovered as a part of the "just and adequate compensation" owed to condemnees under our constitutional provision. Bowers v. Fulton County, 221 Ga. 731 (146 SE2d 884) (1966). The enactment of OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...[1] The critical question in this case, whether seeking administrative payment of relocation expenses precludes a separate judicial determination of the same relocation expenses in the statutorily authorized condemnation proceedings, can only be answered by analyzing what role OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...257, 261 (9 SE 1086) (1889); Mills on Eminent Domain, p. 239 (2d Ed. 1888); 1 Nichols on Eminent Domain (3d Ed. 1981), § 4.105 et seq. See D.O.T. v. Doss, 238 Ga. 480 (233 SE2d 144) (1977), overruled on other grounds 242 Ga. 707. But, were this not a case involving payments under OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...§ 95A-623), condemnee would be able to litigate the question of his business relocation expenses as an element of "just and adequate compensation" in the condemnation proceedings under OCGA § 32-3-1 et seq. (Code Ann. § 95A-601 et seq.). Bowers v. Fulton County, supra. Through our own version of the Uniform Act, OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann....

...s displaced by federally funded programs may seek and receive compensation for their business relocation expenses. [2] *69 This condemnee chose to seek an administrative determination and accept payment of his business relocation expenses under OCGA § 32-8-1 (Code Ann. § 95A-623). He accepted payments under that award, but being dissatisfied, he elected to appeal the administrative determination. Having accepted the payments, he is committed to an administrative determination of the payments. See OCGA § 32-8-1 (c) (3) (Code Ann....

...eneral Assemblies and by the courts of the respective states." [2] We note, however, that a condemnee in an action involving a federally assisted highway project is not required to accept relocation expenses administratively under this statute. OCGA § 32-8-1 (c) (3) (Code Ann....