Southern v. Cobb County, 32096.

• Decision Date: 18 November 1948
• Docket Number: No. 32096.,32096.
• Citation: 50 S.E.2d 226
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: SOUTHERN et al. v. COBB COUNTY.

50 S.E.2d 226

SOUTHERN et al.

v.COBB COUNTY.

No. 32096.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

Nov. 18, 1948.

Error from Superior Court, Cobb County; J. H. Hawkins, Judge.

Condemnation proceedings by Cobb County by G. H. McMillan, Commissioner, etc., against A. G. Southern, and others, for purpose of widening and paving a public road. To review the judgment, defendants bring error.

Judgment affirmed.

Statement of Facts.

This was a condemnation case, Cobb County bringing the proceedings for the purpose of widening and paving a public road. A board of assessors was regularly appointed and sworn, and they assessed the actual value of the property taken to be $100.00, and found that the consequential damages to the adjoining property exceeded the consequential benefits by $75.00. The plaintiffs in error, being unsatisfied with this finding, appealed to a trial de novo before a jury in the Superior Court. At the trial evidence of-the value of the property was introduced, including pictures of the property before the road was widened, and the jury were taken to the scene for a view of the premises as they appeared after the road had been widened. The jury found the actual value of the property taken to be $100.00; but foundthat the consequential benefits balanced off the consequential damages. Judgment was entered for $100.00 in accordance with the verdict.

O. C. Hancock, of Atlanta, for plaintiffs in error.

J. G. Roberts, of Marietta, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

MacINTYRE, Presiding Judge.

1. "Private property shall not be taken, or damaged, for public purposes, without just and adequate compensation being first paid." Constitution of 1945, Art. I, Sect. III, Par. I, Code Ann. § 2-301. "Prospective and consequential damages resulting therefrom may also be taken into consideration, if the same are plain and appreciable; and on the other hand, the increase of the value of the land from the proposed public improvement may be considered, but in no case shall the owner be deprived of the actual damages by such estimated increase." Code, § 36-506. In the instant case the jury awarded $100.00 actual damages for the value of the land taken, but found that the consequential damages were balanced off by the consequential benefits. The court entered judgment for $100.00 in accordance with the verdict.

2. "Jurors are not absolutely bound to accept as correct the opinions or estimates of witnesses as to the value of property, though...