Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945

King v. City of McCaysville

Supreme Court of Georgia · Decided February 7, 1945 · Grice, Wyatt

33 S.E.2d 99; 198 Ga. 829; 1945 Ga. LEXIS 243 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

17 later published cases cite this decision.

City of Atlanta v. Heirs of Champion (Ga. 1979)
Heirs of Champion v. City of Atlanta (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)
Central of Georgia Electric Membership Corp. v. Mills (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)
City of Atlanta v. First National Bank of Atlanta (Ga. 1980)
Harwell v. Georgia Power Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
City of Atlanta v. First National Bank (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
Zuber Lumber Co. v. City of Atlanta (Ga. 1976)
Department of Transportation v. Foremost Realty, Inc. (Ga. Ct. App. 1975)
NORTON REALTY & LOAN COMPANY, INC. v. Bd. of Ed. of Hall County (Ga. Ct. App. 1973)
Department of Transportation v. Livaditis (Ga. Ct. App. 1973)
Leach v. Georgia Power Company (Ga. 1971)
Miles v. Brown (Ga. 1967)
Miller v. Georgia Power Company (Ga. 1966)
Varnadoe v. Housing Authority (Ga. 1965)
Housing Authority v. Hall (Ga. 1962)
Carroll v. DeKalb County (Ga. 1961)
Kellett v. Fulton County (Ga. 1959)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Grice, Justice.

1. The amendment to the charter of the City of McCaysville, enacted in 1941 (Ga. L. 1941, p. 1596), merely re-enacted in the main the provisions of the charter granted by the General Assembly in 1920 (Ga. L. 1920, p. 1236), as amended in 1922 (Ga. L. 1922, p. 909), and in 1935 (Ga. L. 1935, p. 1121); arid the act first above referred to brought about no such repeal of the charter, nor material change in the form of government as contemplated by the terms of the Code, § 69-101.

2. In the absence of bad faith, the exercise of the right of eminent domain rests largely in the discretion of the authority exercising such right, as to the necessity, and what and how much land shall be taken. Savannah Ry. Co. v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 112 Ga. 941 (38 S. E. 353) ; s. c. 115 Ga. 554 (42 S. E. 1) ; Gardner v. Ga. R. & Bkg. Co., 117 Ga. 522 (43 S. E. 863). Nothing in Sheppard v. Edison, 161 Ga. 907 (132 S. E. 218), requires a contrary ruling. See the same case on its second ap *830 pearance in this court, Sheppard v. Edison, 166 Ga. 111 (9) (142 S. E. 535).

No. 15087. February 7, 1945.

3. A landowner can not prevent the taking of his property for public purposes merely because there is other property which might have been suitable for the purpose. 18 Am. Jur., 735, § 108.

4. That the landowner was furnishing to several persons water from a spring on the premises sought to be condemned, affords no reason why the property should not be condemned for a larger use by the public, it not appearing that the property was already devoted to a public use.

5. The court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, J., absent because of illness. *831 William A. Butt, for plaintiff. T. II. Crawford, A. J. Henderson, and John S. Wood, for defendant.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.