O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 36-72-1 (2019)

Legislative findings and intent

✓ 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

(a) The care accorded the remains of deceased persons reflects respect and regard for human dignity as well as cultural, spiritual, and religious values. The General Assembly declares that human remains and burial objects are not property to be owned by the person or entity which owns the land or water where the human remains and burial objects are interred or discovered, but human remains and burial objects are a part of the finite, irreplaceable, and nonrenewable cultural heritage of the people of Georgia which should be protected. (b) It is the intent of the General Assembly that the provisions of this chapter be construed to require respectful treatment of human remains in accord with the equal and innate dignity of every human being and consistent with the identifiable ethnic, cultural, and religious affiliation of the deceased individual as indicated by the method of burial or other historical evidence or reliable information.

History

Code 1981, § 36-72-1, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 274, § 3.

Annotations

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL For an update of crimes and offenses for which the Georgia Crime Information Center is authorized to collect and

file identifying data, see 1991 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 91-35.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1994–2018 · leading case: City of Sandy Springs Et Al. v. Mills, 771 S.E.2d 405 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Sandy Springs Et Al. v. Mills, 771 S.E.2d 405 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “See OCGA §§ 36-72-1 to 36-72-16; Ga. L. 1991, p.”

Smith v. Pulaski Cnty., 501 S.E.2d 213 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 2× “In February 1997, appellant Kathleen Lamkin Jackson Smith and other members of her family filed a petition for mandamus against Pulaski County and its sole commissioner, John Anderson, claiming that the County had an affirmative obligation under the Georgia Abandoned Cemeteries…”

In Re Application of the City of Barnesville (Ga. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “The City of Barnesville, Georgia, applied to the superior court for a permit under the Abandoned Cemeteries and Burial Grounds Act, OCGA §§ 36-72-1 et seq., to disinter and relocate human remains and burial objects in a cemetery located on property owned by the City.”

Pine Ridge Recycling, Inc. v. Butts Cnty., 886 F. Supp. 851 (M.D. Ga. 1994). · cites it 2× “3 of the Cemetery ordinance sets out the prohibited acts, including the willful disturbance of a burial place without having acquired a permit under O.C.G.A. § 36-72-1 (1993), and the failure of any person seeking a permit under the ordinance to not follow its dictates.”

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.