Waldrep v. Hall County

Supreme Court of Georgia

Waldrep v. Hall County

181 S.E.2d 833, 227 Ga. 554, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 771

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMay 6, 1971

Docket26436

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 181 S.E.2d 833 (Waldrep v. Hall County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Waldrep v. Hall County, 181 S.E.2d 833, 227 Ga. 554, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 771 (Ga. 1971).

Pincite

Opinions

Nichols, Justice.

1. The first enumeration of error contends that a part of the property allegedly traversed by the road is inside the city limits of the City of Gainesville and that, therefore, the City of Gainesville is a necessary party to the litigation. Under the decision in County of Gordon v. Mayor &c. of Calhoun, 128 Ga. 781 (58 SE 360), relied upon by appellant the city would have been a proper party, but where the issue is whether the road [559]*559was dedicated by implication at a time when none of the area traversed by the alleged road was inside the corporate limits, the city is not a necessary party to the litigation. Ño question as to duty to maintain such road is involved, but solely whether there exists a public road.

2. The remaining enumerations of error complain that the evidence did not disclose a dedication by the defendant and an acceptance by the plaintiff and that the pleadings and evidence did not show any description of the property which the defendant is enjoined from interfering with.

The judgment of the trial court was authorized by the evidence and supported by the legal principles set forth in such decree. The judgment granting the temporary injunction must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Felton, J., who dissents.

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

Nichols, Justice.

1. The first enumeration of error contends that a part of the property allegedly traversed by the road is inside the city limits of the City of Gainesville and that, therefore, the City of Gainesville is a necessary party to the litigation. Under the decision in County of Gordon v. Mayor &c. of Calhoun, 128 Ga. 781 (58 SE 360), relied upon by appellant the city would have been a proper party, but where the issue is whether the road [559]*559was dedicated by implication at a time when none of the area traversed by the alleged road was inside the corporate limits, the city is not a necessary party to the litigation. Ño question as to duty to maintain such road is involved, but solely whether there exists a public road.

2. The remaining enumerations of error complain that the evidence did not disclose a dedication by the defendant and an acceptance by the plaintiff and that the pleadings and evidence did not show any description of the property which the defendant is enjoined from interfering with.

The judgment of the trial court was authorized by the evidence and supported by the legal principles set forth in such decree. The judgment granting the temporary injunction must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Felton, J., who dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 S.E.2d 833, 227 Ga. 554, 1971 Ga. LEXIS 771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waldrep-v-hall-county-ga-1971.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack