City of Atlanta v. Holcomb

Court of Appeals of Georgia

City of Atlanta v. Holcomb

93 S.E. 259, 20 Ga. App. 601, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 988

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 25, 1917

Docket8259

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 93 S.E. 259 (City of Atlanta v. Holcomb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Atlanta v. Holcomb, 93 S.E. 259, 20 Ga. App. 601, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 988 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The notice to the city was sufficient to put the city on notice of the claim of the alleged damages.

2. If, by a city’s construction of drains in a negligent manner, surface-water from the streets and adjacent property is cast upon an adjoining lot and is caused to pond thereon, or if by negligent construction or maintenance of such drains there be thrown upon such lot surface-water polluted by filth and laden with noxious odors, the owner of the lot may recover the damages sustained in consequence thereof. Mayor &c. of Brunswick v. Tucker, 103 Ga. 233 (29 S. E. 701); Holmes v. Atlanta, 113 Ga. 961 (39 S. E. 458); Langley v. Augusta, 118 Ga. 590 (45 S. E. 486, 98 Am. St. R. 133).

3. An owner of realty, suing a city for damages, can not recover, for damage to the freehold, the value of earth washed away by negligently maintained drainage, and also recover the difference between the market value of the lot before the earth was washed away and its value afterward. City of Atlanta v. Swiney, ante, 415 (93 S. E. 24).

4. The petition as amended was not subject to the general demurrer, nor to the special demurrers that were overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Luke, J.

1. The notice to the city was sufficient to put the city on notice of the claim of the alleged damages.

2. If, by a city’s construction of drains in a negligent manner, surface-water from the streets and adjacent property is cast upon an adjoining lot and is caused to pond thereon, or if by negligent construction or maintenance of such drains there be thrown upon such lot surface-water polluted by filth and laden with noxious odors, the owner of the lot may recover the damages sustained in consequence thereof. Mayor &c. of Brunswick v. Tucker, 103 Ga. 233 (29 S. E. 701); Holmes v. Atlanta, 113 Ga. 961 (39 S. E. 458); Langley v. Augusta, 118 Ga. 590 (45 S. E. 486, 98 Am. St. R. 133).

3. An owner of realty, suing a city for damages, can not recover, for damage to the freehold, the value of earth washed away by negligently maintained drainage, and also recover the difference between the market value of the lot before the earth was washed away and its value afterward. City of Atlanta v. Swiney, ante, 415 (93 S. E. 24).

4. The petition as amended was not subject to the general demurrer, nor to the special demurrers that were overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 S.E. 259, 20 Ga. App. 601, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-atlanta-v-holcomb-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack