Stegall v. Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority

• Decision Date: 04 May 1944
• Docket Number: 14783.
• Citation: Stegall v. Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority, 197 Ga. 571, 30 S.E.2d 196 (Ga. 1944)
• Parties: STEGALL v. SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

30 S.E.2d 196

197 Ga. 571

STEGALL v. SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY.

No. 14783.

Supreme Court of Georgia

May 4, 1944

Syllabus by the Court.

1. In this suit by a citizen and taxpayer against Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority, in which the plaintiff assailed four housing authorities statutes, including an amendment enacted in 1943, a fifth statute known as housing-cooperation law of 1937, as being unconstitutional for a number of reasons alleged, and, so far as related thereto, prayed 'That the said Housing Authorities Law as amended by act of the General Assembly of Georgia approved February 12, 1943, in so far as it authorizes rural housing projects by the defendant, be declared null and void.' Held:

(a) Whether the petition be construed with or without the quoted prayer, the attacks upon the statutes were too general and indefinite to raise any question as to their validity.

(b) An attack upon one statute is futile and will not be determined, when there is another statute to the same effect the validity of which is not drawn in question.

(c) Under the preceding rulings, all attacks upon the statutes fail, and therefore the statute are to be treated as valid in the instant case.

2. There being no allegations to show a dereliction of duty or impending dereliction on the part of the taxing authorities it is to be presumed that all property mentioned in the petition will be duly taxed through proper official action, if it is subject to taxation under the constitution.

(a) Nor does it appear that the governing authorities of the petitioner's county have entered or are about to enter into any service contract with the defendant, or that they have paid or intend to pay any sum as expense of the first year's operation. Consequently, it does not appear that the plaintiff as a taxpayer is about to be injured by any action as to either of these matters.

3. The allegations to the effect that the defendant housing authority is about to enter upon a housing project that is not in keeping with the statutes did not show cause for injunctive relief in favor of the petitioner as a taxpayer.

4. The defendant having sued Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority as a corporate entity is estopped to deny its corporate existence. However, it is not a county, municipality, or political division within the meaning of the constitutional provision contained in the Code, § 2-5501, Const. art. 7,§ 7, par. 1, and, therefore, its obligations will not be debts of a county, municipality, or political division within the purview of that provision.

(a) The petition did not state a cause of action, and was properly dismissed on general demurrer.

Ivan B. Stegall, as a citizen and taxpayer of Thomas County, filed a suit in the superior court of that county against Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority, for an injunction and other relief. The court sustained a general demurrer and dismissed the petition, and the plaintiff excepted to this judgment.

The petition contained substantially the following averments:

(1) The plaintiff is a citizen, resident, and taxpayer of Thomas County, Georgia, is the owner of farm lands, is engaged in farming in said county, and resides within the area of the defendant's operations.

(2) The defendant, Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority, for the County of Thomas and ten other counties named, is a public body corporate organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of Georgia, with authority to exercise the powers and other functions prescribed by acts of the General Assembly known as the housing authorities laws of Georgia. The said defendant, which will be hereinafter called the 'Regional Authority,' has an office, agent, and place of business in Thomas County, Georgia.

(3) Prior to February 12, 1943, each of the eleven counties had become duly organized and was functioning as a County Housing Authority under act No. 411, page 210, of the Laws of 1937, as amended by acts Nos. 241 and 249, pages 112, 124, of 1939. These County Housing Authorities, hereinafter referred to as 'County Authorities,' had entered into loan and annual contributions contracts with the United States Housing Authority, under which the latter agreed to lend to each of said County Authorities 90 per cent. of the cost of constructing homes for farmers of low income, and also agreed to make to each of said County Authorities, during a period of not exceeding sixty years, an annual contribution of 3 per cent. of the total construction and development cost of said homes, the said annual contributions being made for the purpose of permitting said homes to achieve their low rent character. Under the said loan contracts, each of the County Authorities borrowed from the United States Housing Authority, upon short-time notes, a sum of money stated, the total amount for the eleven counties being $487,500. All of said notes were outstanding and unpaid on April 20, 1943, the date on which the said Regional Authority, the defendant herein, was organized.

In accordance with the said loan contracts and in pursuance of certain agreements, leases, and conveyances, copies of which are attached as exhibits, each of the said County Authorities has entered into agreements with farm owners and tenants in forms set out in said exhibits, and has accepted deeds from owners of farm property to approximately one acre of land, on each of which a dwelling is being or will be built, to be leased 'for' a tenant farmer, the head of a family, who is, (1) eligible and admissible as a tenant in the low rent housing project under the provisions of said act and the United States Housing Act of 1937 as amended, 42 U.S. C.A. § 1401 et seq., and (b) is actively engaged in operating his farm, or is a farmer, tenant, share cropper, or wage hand. 'Petitioner directs the court's attention particularly to the fact that the proposal to convey lands * * * contains an agreement that the landowner has an option to re-purchase at any time, and that the landowner or his tenant, share-cropper or wage hand, is given priority in the occupancy of the house being built, provided that such landowner, tenant, sharecropper or wage hand is the head of a family of low income, and is otherwise eligible as a tenant within the meaning of said acts; and also an agreement that so long as the house is made available, the land on which it is situated, and the adjoining farm, will not be used for any purpose other than farming and will be operated or worked upon by the farmer as a tenant, or by a share-cropper or wage hand, except with the consent of said county authority. Said proposal to convey further provides that each landowner who conveys to the county authority shall demolish or eliminate at least one unsafe or insanitary dwelling unit.'

(4) Between the first and fifteenth days of April, 1943, the governing bodies of each of the aforesaid county authorities adopted resolutions agreeing to transfer all their rights, contracts, agreements, obligations, and all real and personal property, to the regional authority, upon its organization.

(5) On or about April 20, 1943, the board of commissioners of roads and revenues of each of the eleven counties named, the said counties being 'contiguous,' adopted a resolution, determining the existence of the facts and conditions essential to organization of a Regional Housing Authority under the act of the General Assembly approved February 12, 1943, Laws 1943, p. 146 et seq., such facts and conditions being enumerated in the petition. The said resolutions were adopted after notice and public hearings as required by the act of 1943.

(6) On the same date, April 20, 1943, the boards of commissioners of roads and revenues of each of the said counties adopted another resolution appointing a commissioner for the Regional Authority, and these several appointments were approved by the State director of housing. Thereafter, the said commissioners met and duly organized the Regional Authority under the corporate name 'Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority;' and the said authority now purports to be a body corporate and politic, and to be vested with all the powers and functions described in said Housing Authorities law.

(7) The said regional housing authority claims that by reason of the act of February 12, 1943, amending the State Housing Authorities law, and by reason of the resolutions above mentioned it has been substituted for and has succeeded to all of the rights, powers, obligations, and conditions set forth in the contracts heretofore entered into by the county authorities, and it will proceed to carry out all of the terms, conditions, and obligations of these contracts, assuming the indebtedness upon all the notes mentioned above, and will proceed to construct the homes mentioned in said contracts, and will rent the same in accordance therewith unless restrained by the court from so doing.

(8) On June 1, 1943, the Regional Housing Authority entered into a consolidated loan contract with the Federal Public Housing Authority, successor to the United States Housing Authority, whereby the said Federal Housing Authority agreed to lend to the Regional Housing Authority the sum of $1,163,700, by purchasing its bonds in this amount, but not to exceed 90 per cent. of the development cost of the project; the said contract providing also for the construction of 648 dwelling units in the counties comprising said Regional Housing Authority, at an average cost of $1800 per dwelling unit, each to be rented for approximately $75 per year and to be operated in accordance with the contracts herein mentioned.

The contract further provided that the Regional Housing Authority would issue and sell to the public...