Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The boundaries of Georgia, as deduced from the Constitution of Georgia, the Convention of Beaufort, the Articles of Cession and Agreement with the United States of America entered into on April 24, 1802, the Resolution of the General Assembly dated December 8, 1826, and the adjudications and compromises affecting Alabama, Florida, and South Carolina are as follows:
From the sea, at the point where the northern edge of the navigable channel of the River Savannah intersects a point three geographical miles east of the ordinary low water mark, generally along the northern edge of the navigable channel up the River Savannah, along the northern edge of the sediment basin to the Tidegate, thence along the stream thereof to the fork or confluence made by the Rivers Keowee and Tugalo, and thence along said River Tugalo until the fork or confluence made by said Tugalo and the River Chattooga, and up and along the same to the point where it touches the northern boundary line of South Carolina, and the southern boundary line of North Carolina, which is at a point on the thirty-fifth parallel of north latitude, reserving all the islands in said Rivers Savannah, Tugalo, and Chattooga, except for the Barnwell Islands and Oyster Bed Island in the Savannah, to Georgia; thence on said line west, to a point where it merges into and becomes the northern boundary line of Alabama - it being the point fixed by the survey of the State of Georgia, and known as Nickajack; thence in a direct line to the great bend of the Chattahoochee River, called Miller's Bend - it being the line run and marked by said survey; and thence along and down the western bank of said Chattahoochee River, along the line or limit of high-water mark, to its junction with the Flint River; thence along a certain line of survey made by Gustavus J. Orr, a surveyor on the part of Georgia, and W. Whitner, a surveyor on the part of Florida, beginning at a fore-and-aft tree about four chains below the junction; thence along this line east, to a point designated 37 links north of Ellicott's Mound on the St. Marys River; thence along the middle of said river to the Atlantic Ocean, and extending therein three geographical miles from ordinary low water along those portions of the coast and coastal islands in direct contact with the open sea or three geographical miles from the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters; thence running in a northerly direction and following the direction of the Atlantic Coast to the point where the northern edge of the navigable channel of the River Savannah intersects a point three geographical miles east of the ordinary low water mark, the place of beginning; including all the lands, waters, islands, and jurisdictional rights within said limits; and also all the islands within three geographical miles of the seacoast.
(Laws 1788, Cobb's 1851 Digest, p. 150; Code 1863, § 17; Code 1868, § 15; Code 1873, § 15; Code 1882, § 15; Civil Code 1895, § 16; Civil Code 1910, § 16; Ga. L. 1916, p. 29, § 1; Code 1933, § 15-101; Ga. L. 1969, p. 678, § 1; Ga. L. 1994, p. 824, § 1.)
Grants made previous to settlement of boundary dispute between two states are void if those grants conflict with such settlement. Coffee v. Groover, 123 U.S. 1, 8 S. Ct. 1, 31 L. Ed. 51 (1887).
- General rule is that where a river is the boundary between two states, if the original property is in neither, and there is no convention respecting it, each state holds to the middle of the stream. Georgia Ry. & Power v. Wright, 146 Ga. 29, 90 S.E. 465 (1916).
- That part of the Savannah River which is broken by islands, located between an island and the Georgia mainland, is within the jurisdiction and sovereignty of this state by virtue of this section, and a dam constructed across the river from an island to the Georgia shore is subject to taxation in this state. Georgia Ry. & Power v. Wright, 146 Ga. 29, 90 S.E. 465 (1916).
- Salt waters of this state extend from the mean low watermark of the foreshore three geographical miles offshore; except where a low tide elevation is situated within three nautical miles seaward of the low water line along the coast, the state's three mile boundary is measured from such low tide elevation. Department of Natural Resources v. Joyner, 241 Ga. 390, 245 S.E.2d 644 (1978).
- Baselines shall not be drawn to and from low tide elevations unless lighthouses or similar permanently visible installations above sea level are built upon them. Department of Natural Resources v. Joyner, 143 Ga. App. 868, 240 S.E.2d 114 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 241 Ga. 390, 245 S.E.2d 644 (1978).
Normal baseline for measuring territorial sea is low water line. Department of Natural Resources v. Joyner, 143 Ga. App. 868, 240 S.E.2d 114 (1977), rev'd on other grounds, 241 Ga. 390, 245 S.E.2d 644 (1978).
- Whichever line is correct, low tide or high tide, as the dividing line between private property sought to be registered and the state's property, the state is still an adjoining landowner and should have been so named in the petition and served other than by the advertisement "to whom it may concern," and a land registration judgment, if granted, would not be binding upon an adjoining landowner who was not named and served. State v. Bruce, 231 Ga. 783, 204 S.E.2d 106 (1974).
- Islands that emerged in the Savannah River after the 1787 Treaty of Beaufort do not affect the boundary line between Georgia and South Carolina. Georgia v. South Carolina, 497 U.S. 376, 110 S. Ct. 2903, 111 L. Ed. 2d 309 (1990).
South Carolina established sovereignty over the Barnwell Islands in the Savannah River by prescription and acquiescence, since there was a record of almost-uniform taxation of property on the islands by South Carolina authorities, policing and prosecutorial activities by South Carolina authorities, and patrolling by South Carolina wildlife officers. Georgia v. South Carolina, 497 U.S. 376, 110 S. Ct. 2903, 111 L. Ed. 2d 309 (1990).
- Tybee Island is to be regarded as the "headland" for the south side of the mouth of the Savannah River, and the long-existing shoal forms the north side of the mouth in determining the lateral seaward boundary between Georgia and South Carolina. Georgia v. South Carolina, 497 U.S. 376, 110 S. Ct. 2903, 111 L. Ed. 2d 309 (1990).
Cited in United States v. Louisiana, 363 U.S. 1, 80 S. Ct. 961, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1025 (1960).
- Addition of the phrase "and coastal islands," in this section does not render the Georgia law inconsistent with the Submerged Lands Act, but appears to be simply an attempt to clarify one question left unanswered by the Submerged Lands Act, but answered by the Supreme Court in United States v. California, 381 U.S. 139, 85 S. Ct. 1401, 14 L. Ed. 2d 296 (1965), that is, how are coastal islands to be treated in determining the seaward boundary. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 76-95 (see O.C.G.A50-2-1).
- Seaward boundary of Georgia's tidal or salt waters should be determined using the rules set forth in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 76-95.
Boundary between Georgia and Alabama along Chattahoochee River is west bank of that river. 1962 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 26.
- If the state is classed with all of the other owners of tidewater land, the boundaries of the state's property clearly extend to the low-water mark or encompass generally the entire tidewater bed; on the other hand, when the state's unique position as local political sovereign is taken into consideration, the state's rights of ownership extend far beyond this point for an additional three miles out to sea. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-49.
- 72 Am. Jur. 2d, States, Territories, and Dependencies, § 26 et seq.
- 81A C.J.S., States, §§ 12, 16 et seq.
- Validity, construction, and application of Submerged Lands Act (SLA) of 1953, 43 U.S.C.A. §§ 1301 et seq., 68 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 363.
Total Results: 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1999-11-22
Citation: 524 S.E.2d 455, 271 Ga. 726, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 4106, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 1029
Snippet: (1961). [21] OCGA § 52-1-3(3). [22] See OCGA §§ 50-2-1; 50-2-20; 52-2-1. [23] See City of Atlanta v.
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1995-01-30
Citation: 265 Ga. 55, 452 S.E.2d 761
Snippet: Moore & J. Lucas, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 50.02[1] (2d ed. 1992).