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 O.C.G.A. § 36-3-24

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

Copy

Bibb Cnty. v. Monroe Cnty., 294 Ga. 730 (Ga. 2014).

Cited 60 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 10, 2014 | 755 S.E.2d 760

...allow 30 days within which the authorities of either county may file “a protest or exceptions thereto.” OCGA § 36-3-23. Where such protest or exceptions are filed, the Secretary must, after giving written notice to the parties, hold a hearing. 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.” Id. Upon the making of a decision by the Secretary of State pursuant to Code Section 36-3-24 or in case no protest or exceptions are filed within the 30 days, the Secretary of State shall cause the survey and plat to be recorded in a book to be kept for that purpose, whereupon the same shall be final and conclusive as to the boundary line in dispute .....
...on of the boundary line. Where 5 a protest is filed, however, the Secretary is obligated to “determine” what constitutes “the true boundary line” after considering “the law and evidence.” OCGA § 36-3-24. Because of the political nature of the decision-making surrounding county boundary lines, Bibb County and the Secretary contend that any dispute regarding the boundary setting process presents a purely political question that is non-justiciable....
...surveyor’s survey and plat; the Secretary’s duty in this circumstance is mandatory. Where, however, as here, a protest is filed, the Secretary is obligated to “determine” what constitutes “the true boundary line” after considering “the law and evidence.” OCGA § 36-3-24....
Copy

Kemp v. Monroe Cnty.; Bibb Cnty. v. Monroe Cnty., 298 Ga. 67 (Ga. 2015).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 2, 2015 | 779 S.E.2d 330

...For the purpose of these political proceedings, the legislature vested in the Secretary of State the authority to determine the true boundary line between counties where the boundary is in dispute and the discretion to fashion a process by which the Secretary is to receive evidence and reach a decision. OCGA § 36-3-24....
...from the law and evidence the true boundary line in dispute between the respective counties.” Id. 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, including procedures related to the opening and closing of the record and rules related to the time and process within which a decision must be made, the Secretary is not constrained to do so....
...icially under the statutes, but acts politically). See generally OCGA § 36-3-25 (imposing upon Secretary of State the obligation to record the survey and plat not within any particular time but “[u]pon the making of a decision pursuant to Code Section 36-3-24")....