O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 36-72-3 (2019)

Authority of counties and municipalities to preserve abandoned cemeteries

✓ 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

Counties, anywhere within the county boundaries, and municipalities, anywhere within the municipal boundaries, are authorized, jointly and severally, to preserve and protect any abandoned cemetery or any burial ground which the county or municipality determines has been abandoned or is not being maintained by the person who is legally responsible for its upkeep, whether or not that person is financially capable of doing so, to expend public money in connection therewith, to provide for reimbursement of such funds by billing any legally responsible person or levying upon any of his property as authorized by local ordinance, and to exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire any interest in land necessary for that purpose.

History

Code 1981, § 36-72-3, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 924, § 3; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2508, § 2.

Annotations

Law reviews. - For annual survey article discussing local government law, see 51 Mercer L. Rev. 397 (1999).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Duty of county. - O.C.G.A. § 36-72-3 authorizes but does not compel a county to preserve and protect abandoned cemeter-

ies. Smith v. Pulaski County, 269 Ga. 688, 501 S.E.2d 213 (1998).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Persons sentenced to community service may be utilized to assist counties or municipalities in the care of abandoned

cemeteries or burial grounds. 1999 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U99-5.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1998–2015 · 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× “However, I would further note that even if a jury finds that the burial ground has been abandoned, it does not follow that Mills’ ability to build on the property is unfettered. First, the permitting statute appears to apply to the development of all burial grounds and…”

Smith v. Pulaski Cnty., 501 S.E.2d 213 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 36-72-3 provides in pertinent part: Counties .”

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.