Enzor v. Askew
| Decision Date | 12 February 1941 |
| Docket Number | 13615. |
| Citation | 13 S.E.2d 374,191 Ga. 576 |
| Parties | ENZOR v. ASKEW. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Paul Donehoo, James R. Venable, and E. W. Fountain, all of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
G N. Bynum, of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Mrs Ira Askew filed her petition against James H. Enzor, in which she made the following allegations: She is the owner of a house and lot on the north side of Memorial Drive, in said county. She is informed and believes that the defendant is the owner of or has an equitable interest in or to a lot of land on the south side of Memorial Drive. The area on the south side, which includes the defendant's property, is zoned for residential purposes only, by order of the commissioner of the county, under the authority granted to him by the act approved January 10, 1938, which provides that the commissioner may zone an area upon consent given to him by written petition of the owners of fifty-one per cent. of the real property within the area to be zoned; that such written consent was given him; that plaintiff's property is located across the street from said zoned area; that the defendant has done some grading and has informed some of the owners of real property within the zoned area that he intends to erect a filling station on his property; that the erection of the filling station would depreciate the value of plaintiff's property in such a manner that the amount of her damages could not be ascertained; that the filling station would be a source of annoyance and worry, would increase the hazard of traffic accidents, especially for children, and create an unfavorable influence for the rearing of children. She prayed that the defendant be enjoined from erecting a filling station or any other business establishment on his property within the zoned area.
The defendant demurred to the petition on general and special grounds, and all of such grounds the court either sustained or overruled; but the defendant excepted only to the overruling of his general demurrer.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
1. A petition to enjoin erection and operation of a gasoline filling station within an area declared to be a restricted zone, the use of the property in which was limited to residential purposes, under the authority of the act approved January 10, 1938 (Ga.L.Ex.Sess.1937-1938, p. 414), as amended by the act approved March 24, 1939 (Ga.L.1939, p. 406), was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State on Inf. of Wallach v. Loesch
... ... Board of Commrs. of Vanderburgh County v. Sanders, ... 218 Ind. 43, 30 N.E.2d 713; Acker v. Baldwin, 18 ... Cal.2d 341, 115 P.2d 455; Enzor v. Askew, 191 Ga. 576, 13 ... S.E.2d 374 ... Westhues, ... C. Bohling and Barrett, CC. , concur ... ... ...
-
Griffith v. Newman, 21446
...of the county, the petition showed the close proximity of the broiler house to their homes and under the holding of Enzor v. Askew, 191 Ga. 576(1), 13 S.E.2d 374, sufficiently set forth their right to complain of the violation of the zoning law. It was not, in this factual situation, necess......
-
Lindsey v. City of Fayetteville
...gasoline stations have been excluded from residential districts due to the increased risk of traffic accidents. Enzor v. Askew, 191 Ga. 576, 13 S.E.2d 374 (1971). It has even been held that a failure to consider the effect of reclassification upon the traffic problem may result in judicial ......
-
Barton v. Hardin
... ... present case. See Howden v. Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah, ... 172 Ga. 833, 159 S.E. 401; Enzor v. Askew, 191 Ga ... 576, 13 S.E.2d 374; Snow v. Johnson, 197 Ga. 146, 28 ... S.E.2d 270 ... 3. In ... the instant case ... ...