Glidden Co. v. City of Collins
| Decision Date | 15 February 1940 |
| Docket Number | 13110 |
| Citation | 7 S.E.2d 266,189 Ga. 656 |
| Parties | GLIDDEN CO. v. CITY OF COLLINS. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
The Glidden Company, as owner of a tract of land on which it operates a plant for the manufacture of pine tar and products from crude turpentine, instituted an action seeking to enjoin the City of Collins from taking by eminent domain a strip of land fifty feet wide through petitioner's property to be used as a street. A temporary restraining order was granted. The defendant filed an answer.
On the interlocutory hearing the plaintiff introduced evidence to the following effect: Its plant represents an investment of approximately $225,000. One unit is used in distilling crude turpentine gum, and another for the purpose of processing tar extracted from pine wood. The plant covers a considerable area and an additional space is required for storing wood, and to provide room for customers who haul crude products to the plant. The proposed street would go through the heart of plaintiff's property dividing it into two sections, and if the plant should be enlarged as contemplated, neither would be sufficiently large for economical plant operations, thus making it necessary to place the new unit across the street which is intended to be used by defendant in connecting up a state highway coming into the city. Such a highway through the property would make it extremely hazardous for the employees who would have to continuously roll rosin barrels across it as well as to traffic. The fire risk would also be greatly increased, as the street would pass directly by the wood stored on the premises, it being very combustible and easily ignited. The proposed street would also subject plaintiff's property to prowlers unless the property was properly fenced, which would cost around $6,000. In the event the plant was enlarged, the proposed street would make it necessary to run water and steam over the highway at a cost of approximately $2,000, which would render the cost of production so high that the prices of competitors could not be met. The street would damage petitioner's property to the extent of at least $10,000. From the description in the notice of condemnation it is impossible to locate the property sought to be condemned. There was also evidence that the council had never given the mayor or any one else authority to purchase the land, and testimony tending to show another route agreed upon by the state highway engineers was more practical.
The evidence for the defendant was to the following effect Petitioner's property would not be damaged, but on the contrary a paved road would add to its value and would tend to drain petitioner's property and serve as a fire break. The land the city seeks to condemn is not worth over $25 which amount was tendered to petitioner. The proposed street is more practical for connecting up the state highway than Manassas Street. The resolution authorizing condemnation of the property was also introduced in evidence.
After hearing evidence the judge entered an order denying an injunction. The plaintiff excepted.
P M. Anderson, of Claxton, for plaintiff in error.
M W. Eason and John P. Rabun,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Atlanta v. Airways Parking Co., 25055
...must describe the easement to be acquired with the same degree of definiteness as is required in a deed to land. Glidden Co. v. City of Collins, 189 Ga. 656, 7 S.E.2d 266; Gunn v. Georgia Power Co., 205 Ga. 85, 52 S.E.2d 449. In B. & W. Hen Farm, Inc. v. Georgia Power Co., 222 Ga. 830(2), 1......
-
United States v. Ivie
...the property sought to be condemned with the same particularity as that prescribed for a deed of conveyance. Glidden Co. v. City of Collins, 189 Ga. 656(2), 7 S.E. 2d 266; Gunn v. Georgia Power Co., 205 Ga. 85, 52 S.E.2d 5. The defendant insists that the description of the property in the p......
-
State Highway Dept. v. Strickland
...trespassing upon or taking the plaintiffs' property for public use. Buchanan v. James, 130 Ga. 546, 61 S.E. 125; Glidden Co. v. City of Collins, 189 Ga. 656, 7 S.E.2d 266; Harrison v. City of East Point, 208 Ga. 692, 69 S.E.2d 3. The evidence introduced on the interlucotory hearing does not......
-
Gunn v. Georgia Power Co.
... ... Central Georgia Power Co ... v. Maddox, 135 Ga. 246, 247, 69 S.E. 109; Glidden ... Co. v. City of Collins, 189 Ga. 656(2), 7 S.E.2d 266 ... In the ... ...