O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 36-3-24 (2019)

Notice and hearing of protest or exceptions by Secretary of State

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If a protest or exceptions to the survey and plat are filed in the Secretary of State’s office within the 30 days, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to give, through the mail, ten days’ written notice of the time when he will hear the protest or exceptions at his office to the county governing authorities of the respective counties. Upon the hearing, the Secretary of State shall determine from the law and evidence the true boundary line in dispute between the respective counties.

History

Ga. L. 1899, p. 24, § 3; Civil Code 1910, § 475; Code 1933, § 23-405.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Constitutionality. - Former Civil Code 1910, §§ 473-475 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 36-3-22 - 36-3-24) were not violative of Ga. Const. 1877, Art. I, Sec. I, Para XXIII (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. III) as an attempt to confer judicial power upon the Secretary of State. Early County v. Baker County, 137 Ga. 126, 72 S.E. 905 (1911), 10 Ga. App. 305, 73 S.E. 352 (1912). Secretary has discretion in conducting hearing. - On remand of a county boundary dispute under O.C.G.A.

§ 36-3-20 et seq., a trial court erred by proscribing the Secretary of State from holding a new hearing or considering additional evidence before determining the boundary between two counties; O.C.G.A. § 36-3-24 gave the Secretary broad discretion in making the Secretary’s determination. Kemp v. Monroe County, 298 Ga. 67, 779 S.E.2d 330 (2015). Mandamus cannot dictate where boundary line to be located. - Trial court erred by granting a county mandamus relief in a county boundary line dis-

pute action pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 36-3-20 et seq., because while mandamus was authorized to compel the Georgia Secretary of State to do certain tasks, it was not authorized to dictate where the boundary line was to be located. Bibb County v. Monroe County, 294 Ga. 730, 755 S.E.2d 760 (2014). Secretary’s authority to subpoena. - Trial court did not err by entering a declar-

atory judgment ordering the land surveyor to comply with the subpoena issued as the Secretary of State had the authority to require the surveyor to appear as a witness at a final hearing on a county boundary-line dispute. Scarborough v. Kemp, 348 Ga. App. 79, 819 S.E.2d 710 (2018). Cited in Fine v. Dade County, 198 Ga. 655, 32 S.E.2d 246 (1944).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2014–2018 · leading case: Bibb Cnty. v. Monroe Cnty., 755 S.E.2d 760 (Ga. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bibb Cnty. v. Monroe Cnty., 755 S.E.2d 760 (Ga. 2014). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 36-3-24. “Upon the hearing, the Secretary of State shall determine from the law and evidence the true boundary line in dispute between the respective counties.”

Kemp v. Monroe Cnty.; Bibb Cnty. v. Monroe Cnty., 779 S.E.2d 330 (Ga. 2015). · cites it 6× “OCGA § 36-3-24. The language of the statutes creating the scheme for determining county boundary lines, however, prescribes no particular process but confers upon the Secretary the broad and undirected discretion to “determine from the law and evidence the true boundary line in…”

Scarborough v. Kemp., 819 S.E.2d 710 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 10× “" 17 Thus, while the Secretary, in his discretion, may incorporate some or all of the rules and processes found in judicial proceedings when making a determination under OCGA § 36-3-24 as to the true boundary line, .”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.