Scott v. Minnix

Decision Date02 April 1957
Docket NumberNo. 1,No. 36590,36590,1
Citation95 Ga.App. 589,98 S.E.2d 196
PartiesJ. H. SCOTT et al. v. A. R. MINNIX
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court.

Since the Clayton County Board of Zoning Appeals was without jurisdiction to proceed as it did, the Superior Court of Clayton County on an appeal to it on the merits of such board proceedings, was likewise without jurisdiction to consider the appeal on the merits of the board's proceedings.

A. R. Minnix applied to the Clayton County Board of Zoning Appeals for a special use permit under the Clayton County zoning ordinance for the use of certain property located in Clayton County. The plaintiffs in error filed written objections to such application. On June 5, 1956, a hearing was had by the board of zoning appeals on the matter. At the close of the hearing, the board of zoning appeals found in favor of the application and granted a special use permit. The plaintiffs in error by petition appealed to the Superior Court of Clayton County. A. R. Minnix filed general and special demurrers to this petition. The court sustained these demurrers giving the plaintiffs in error ten days within which to amend. After amendment, A. R. Minnix renewed his general demurrer which was sustained and the appeal dismissed. To this judgment the plaintiffs in error except.

Albert B. Wallace, Jonesboro, for plaintiffs in error.

Glenn Frick, Hamilton Lokey, Lokey & Bowden, Atlanta, Harold R. Banke, Edwin S. Kemp, Jonesboro, for defendant in error.

FELTON, Chief Judge.

Where it appears in the record, this court may on its own motion inquire into the question of the jurisdiction of this court or the jurisdiction of the court below as to subject matter. Brannon v. Price, 29 Ga.App. 333, 334(6), 115 S.E. 151; Smith v. Ferrario, 105 Ga. 51, 53, 31 S.E. 38; O'Brien v. Harris, 105 Ga. 732, 736, 31 S.E. 745.

The Clayton County Board of Zoning Appeals did not have the power and jurisdiction to proceed as it did and, therefore, the Superior Court of Clayton County did not have jurisdiction in an appeal from such void proceedings as to the merits of such proceedings. The act creating the Clayton County Board of Zoning Appeals sets its powers and jurisdiction. Ga.Laws 1949, Sec. 10, pp. 223, 228. Section 10 of the act provides: 'Appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals may be taken by any officer, department, or board of the county and also by any person or persons having a substantial interest in any decision of an administrative officer or agency seeking to function under authority of or enforce any ordinances pursuant to this Act.' [Emphasis supplied.] The act gives the board of zoning appeals the following powers: '1. To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged by appellant that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative official or agency in the enforcement of this Act or of any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. 2. To authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of such regulations as will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to special conditions full demonstration on the basis of the facts presented, literal enforcement of the provisions of the regulation will result in great practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships, and so that the spirit of the regulation shall be observed and substantial justice done. 3. To permit in appropriate cases, in harmony with the general purposes and intent of such regulations, a building or premises to be erected or used for public utility or public services purposes in any location which is reasonably necessary for public convenience and welfare. In exercising the above mentioned powers such Board, may, in conformity with the provisions of this Act, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly or may modify the order,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Reid v. State, 42954
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 14, 1967
    ...the existence of such jurisdiction. Drury v. City of Woodbine, 96 Ga.App. 158, 99 S.E.2d 550, and cases cited. See also Scott v. Minnix, 95 Ga.App. 589, 98 S.E.2d 196; Lockridge-Rogers Lumber Co. v. City of East Point, 97 Ga.App. 357, 103 S.E.2d In the exercise of this duty the court has ha......
  • Embassy of Benin v. D.C. Bd. of Zon. Adj.
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • November 30, 1987
    ...jurisdiction); see also Kelley v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 126 Conn. 648, 650-54, 13 A.2d 675, 676-77 (1940); Scott v. Minnix, 95 Ga.App. 589, 590, 98 S.E.2d 196, 197 (1957); Balsam v. Jagger, 231 N.Y.S.2d 450, 452 (Sup.Ct. 1962); Scott v. Quittmeyer, 200 N.Y.S.2d 886, 887 (Sup. Ct. 1960); ......
  • Lowe v. Payne, 48781
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 28, 1973
    ...however its lack of jurisdiction may appear.' In accord are Motels, Inc. v. Shadrick, 96 Ga.App. 464, 100 S.E.2d 592; Scott v. Minnix, 95 Ga.App. 589, 590, 98 S.E.2d 196 and cases cited therein. Unless a judgment is final this court does not have the power to rule upon an appeal in the abse......
  • Sanchez v. Walker County Dept. of Family and Children Services, 50545
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 3, 1975
    ...however its lack of jurisdiction may appear.' In accord are Motels, Inc. v. Shadrick, 96 Ga.App. 464, 100 S.E.2d 592; Scott v. Minnix, 95 Ga.App. 589, 590, 98 S.E.2d 196 and cases cited therein. 2. Unless a judgment is final this court does not have the power to rule upon an appeal in the a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT