Constitution of the State of Georgia

Article I. BILL OF RIGHTS · Article I. BILL OF RIGHTS · Section III. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Art. I, Sec. III, Para. II. Private ways.

Active

Current through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.

A constitution provision shown as in force is in force as printed in the volume. A court decision can make a printed provision unenforceable without changing the volume, and the volume does not record that.

In case of necessity, private ways may be granted upon just and adequate compensation being first paid by the applicant.

The notes below are printed with the section but are not enacted law (O.C.G.A. § 1-1-1(c)). They are shown apart from the text.

Other notes

1976 Constitution.: Art. I, Sec. III, Para. I.
the probate courts) or county comprivate way acquired by prescripother private ways sections.: A private way, created by necessary implication, was wholly distinct from a private way over the land of a stranger, also provided by former Code 1933, § 85-1401 (see now O.C.G.A. § 44-9-1), from ‘‘compulsory purchase and sale through the ordinary (now superior court)’’ under the procedure of former Code 1933, §§ 83-101 and 83-102 (see now O.C.G.A. § 44-9-40); and consequently this paragraph had no reference thereto. Calhoun v. Ozburn, 186 Ga. 569, 198 S.E. 706 (1938). Definition of necessity for purposes
of granting private way.: Cases of necessity do not arise except where the way sought to be laid out is absolutely indispensable to the applicant, as a means of reaching the applicant’s property. Chat-tanooga, Rome & S.R.R. v. Philpot, 112 Ga. 153, 37 S.E. 181 (1900); Gaines v. Lunsford, 120 Ga. 370, 47 S.E. 967 (1904). When property right is taken or
vested.: No property right is taken from a property owner, nor vested in a private way petitioner, until after all of the rights have been finally established, the compensation is paid, and the court makes such a ‘‘grant’’ by final judgment. Cline v. McMullan, 263 Ga. 321, 431 S.E.2d 368 (1993). Cotenancy interests in underlying
fee.: Condemnation of an easement against a party who has a cotenancy interest in the underlying fee is not prohibited as a matter of law, but is permissible in cases in which there is sufficient evidence establishing the ‘‘necessity’’ for acquisition of the easement and the exclusive use thereof. Benton v. Georgia Marble Co., 258 Ga. 58, 365 S.E.2d 413 (1988).
Mining or quarrying.: O.C.G.A. § 44-9-70’s ‘‘necessity’’ standard, which is based upon the successful operation of the applicant’s business of mining or quarrying, is a valid exercise of the General Assembly’s state constitutional authority with respect to the declaration of private ways of necessity. Benton v. Georgia Marble Co., 258 Ga. 58, 365 S.E.2d 413 (1988).

Read the official page (the state's PDF, opened at the page this text was read from).

Current through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.

Text read from 2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf, Volume V2, 2016 edition, pages 777 to 778; merge action: annotated; file SHA-256 1b27199d8655.