Haygood v. City of Doraville
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Clarke, Presiding Justice.
The facts in this case indicate that appellants have suffered a serious deprivation which is not counterbalanced by significant public benefit from the present zoning. The deprivation here meets the standards set out in Gradous v. Bd. of Commrs. of Richmond County, 256 Ga. 469 (349 SE2d 707) (1986) and City of Roswell v. Heavy Machines Co., 256 Ga. 472 (349 SE2d 743) (1986), and equals that suffered by the plaintiffs in DeKalb County v. Albritton Properties, 256 *567Ga. 103 (344 SE2d 653) (1986). Because the land of the appellants was rendered practically worthless by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gradous v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1986
- City of Roswell v. HEAVY MACHINES COMPANYSupreme Court of Georgia · 1986
- DeKalb County v. Albritton PropertiesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1986
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stuckey v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- City of Atlanta v. StandishSupreme Court of Georgia · 1987
- City of Atlanta v. StandishSupreme Court of Georgia · 1987
- Rodriguez v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2013
- Sonia Rodriguez v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.