Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 36-3-24 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 36-3-24 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 36-3-24

TITLE 36 LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Section 3. County Boundaries, 36-3-1 through 36-3-27.

ARTICLE 2 SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY DISPUTES

36-3-24. Notice and hearing of protest or exceptions by Secretary of State.

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.

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

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Constitutionality.

- Former Civil Code 1910, §§ 473-475 (see O.C.G.A. §§ 36-3-22 -36-3-24) were not violative of Ga. Const. 1976, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. IV (see 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 dispute 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).

Cited in Fine v. Dade County, 198 Ga. 655, 32 S.E.2d 246 (1944).

Cases Citing Georgia Code 36-3-24 From Courtlistener.com

Total Results: 2

Kemp v. Monroe County; Bibb County v. Monroe County

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2015-11-02

Citation: 298 Ga. 67, 779 S.E.2d 330

Snippet: receive evidence and reach a decision. OCGA § 36-3-24. The language of the statutes creating the scheme

Bibb County v. Monroe County

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-03-10

Citation: 294 Ga. 730, 755 S.E.2d 760

Snippet: notice to the parties, hold a hearing. OCGA § 36-3-24. “Upon the hearing, the Secretary of State shall