O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A. § 44-10-5 (2019)
Validity of easement
✓ 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 conservation easement is valid even though: (1) It is not appurtenant to an interest in real property; (2) It can be or has been assigned to another holder; (3) It is not of a character that has been recognized traditionally at common law; (4) It imposes a negative burden; (5) It imposes affirmative obligations upon the owner of an interest in the burdened property or upon the holder; (6) The benefit does not touch or concern real property; or (7) There is no privity of estate or of contract.
History
Code 1981, § 44-10-5, enacted by Ga. L. 1992, p. 2227, § 1.
Annotations
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. May easement or right of way be appur-
tenant where servient tenement is not adjacent to dominant, 15 A.L.R.7th 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 1997–1997 · leading case: Brian Realty Corp. v. DeKalb Cnty., 493 S.E.2d 595 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997).
Brian Realty Corp. v. DeKalb Cnty., 493 S.E.2d 595 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). “The county is correct in pointing out that once conservation easements, as imposed here, are recorded, the property owner has a right to have his property reassessed pursuant to OCGA § 44-10-5 (currently OCGA § 44-10-8).”
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.