Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 36-61-1 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 36-61-1 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 36-61-1

TITLE 36 LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Chapter 61 information not found

ARTICLE 2 CLERKS OF GOVERNING AUTHORITIES OF MUNICIPALITIES

36-61-1. Short title.

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Urban Redevelopment Law."

(Ga. L. 1955, p. 354, § 1.)

Editor's notes.

- Ga. 1976, p. 946, § 4, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that all powers, privileges, duties, or immunities now or heretofore granted to municipalities by the Urban Redevelopment Law (this chapter), and all Acts amendatory thereof, are granted and conferred upon every county of this state.

Law reviews.

- For survey article on zoning and land use law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 493 (2007) and 60 Mercer L. Rev. 457 (2008).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Housing Authority could sell acquired property to private party.

- Georgia's Urban Redevelopment Law, O.C.G.A. § 36-61-1 et seq., authorized a housing authority to exercise eminent domain to acquire and redevelop urban property found to be a "slum area;" the housing authority's disposition of condemned property was authorized, and the housing authority was entitled to summary judgment on a former owner's claim that property had been acquired and then sold to a private party. Talley v. Housing Auth., 279 Ga. App. 94, 630 S.E.2d 550 (2006).

Cited in City of Stockbridge v. Meeks, 283 Ga. App. 343, 641 S.E.2d 584 (2007).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Application of Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469, 125 S. Ct. 2655, 162 L. Ed. 2d 439 (2005), to "Public Use" restrictions in federal and state constitutions takings clauses and eminent domain statutes, 21 A.L.R.6th 261.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 36-61-1

Total Results: 3  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Frazen v. Downtown Dev. Auth. of Atlanta, 309 Ga. 411 (Ga. 2020).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 29, 2020

...]ulch” since the founding of the city over 150 years ago. On July 14, 2010, the City designated a certain area which included The Gulch as “Atlanta Urban Redevelopment Area No. 1,” pursuant to the Urban Redevelopment Law. See OCGA § 36-61-1 et seq....
Copy

Darling Int'l, Inc. v. Carter, 294 Ga. 455 (Ga. 2014).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 27, 2014 | 754 S.E.2d 347, 2014 Fulton County D. Rep. 106

... notified of the planned rehabilitation of the property as set forth in the plan, and the owner has been offered the opportunity to develop the property in accordance with the plan. In this case, the property was not expressly acquired pursuant to the Urban Redevelopment Law, OCGA § 36-61-1 et seq., but in any event the parties do not dispute it was properly acquired through eminent domain proceedings and that the Lake Alma project was part of a development plan. Even assuming the original condemnation proceeding...
Copy

Allright Auto Parks, Inc. v. City of Atlanta, 257 Ga. 315 (Ga. 1987).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jul 15, 1987 | 357 S.E.2d 797

...ether they wished to exercise their option under § 36-61-9 (c). No specifications were made available by the appellee. In July 1985, the appellee filed a complaint for an in rem condemnation proceeding pursuant to OCGA § 22-2-100 et seq. and OCGA § 36-61-1 et seq....