ZBA File No. B Robert L. McCorkle, III McCorkle & Johnson, LLP Attorney for DBL, Inc.
|
|
- Garry Morrison
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION OF PAUL FARTHING, JESSICA FARTHING, SALLY G. CHANDLER, DENNIS J. CHANDLER, AND JAMES S. MARTIN ZBA File No. B Robert L. McCorkle, III McCorkle & Johnson, LLP Attorney for DBL, Inc. DBL, Inc. ( DBL ), by and through the undersigned, files its Brief in Opposition to the Zoning Board of Appeals ( ZBA ) Application of Paul Farthing, Jessica Farthing, Sally G. Chandler, Dennis J. Chandler, and James S. Martin (collectively referred to as Appellants ), stating as follows: I. Statement of Facts DBL is the owner of Sail Harbor Marina located at 606 Wilmington Island Road ( Lot 33 ) and the adjacent property located at 604 Wilmington Island Road ( Lot 32 ), Chatham County, Georgia. On or around October 24, 2014, DBL submitted an application to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Coastal Resources Division ( DNR ) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers to reduce an existing marina dock that currently originates from Lot 33 (the Application ). A true and correct copy of the Application is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Specifically, DBL sought permission to remove approximately 7,506 sq. ft. of dock that extends to the west of the marina, including a number of floating docks that currently extend westward beyond Lot 33, and to construct and maintain a new series of floating docks that will originate from the existing dock and will continue within the extended property lines of Lot 32. It is important to note that (i) the application seeks to reduce the overall floating space by 3,348 sq. ft, which will reduce impacts upon the coastal marshlands; and (ii) no portion of the proposed modification will connect with the upland portion of Lot 32. (Ex. A). 1
2 The application requires, among other things, a letter from the local governing authority stating that the proposed project is not prohibited by any zoning law. See OCGA (b)(6). In preparing this application, DBL obtained such a determination from Robert Sebek, the Chatham County Zoning Administrator, on May 27, A trued and correct copy of Mr. Sebek s May 27, 2014, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Public notice of DBL s proposed project ran from February 5, 2015, to March 7, During the public notice period, DBL s application, including the May 27, 2014, letter from Mr. Sebek, was publically accessible on the DNR s website. A true and correct copy of the DNR s public notice regarding DBL s Application is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Appellants did not appeal the May 27, 2014, determination of the Zoning Administrator to the ZBA. Appellants responded to the DNR s public notice by providing to the DNR written objections to the Application. True and correct copies of Appellants written objections are attached hereto as Exhibit D. Appellants also obtained local counsel, who, on February 20, 2015, and February 26, 2015, sent letters to Chatham County Attorney Jonathan Hart urging Mr. Hart to compel Mr. Sebek to rescind his May 27, 2014, letter because Lot 32 is currently zoned as multi-family residential property. True and correct copies of Appellants February 20, 2015, and February 26, 2015, letters are attached hereto as Exhibit E. In response, Mr. Hart issued a very carefully worded letter to the DNR offering a variety of opinions, including what he believed the County s reasonable expectations were for Lot 32. A true and correct copy of Mr. Hart s March 4, 2015, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit F. Thereafter, on March 16, 2015, Mr. Sebek provided his own letter to the DNR wherein he referenced Mr. Hart s letter and reaffirmed his May 27, 2014, determination that DBL s proposal is not violative of any zoning law. A true and correct copy of Mr. Sebek s March 16, 2015, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 2
3 G. In response to the DNR s direction that the Zoning Administrator s March 16, 2015, letter should have been addressed to DBL or Stuart Sligh (DBL s agent), Mr. Sebek provided an April 15, 2015, letter, wherein he once again reaffirmed his May 27, 2014, determination and stated, for the third time, that he was not aware of any reason the owner may not, with proper State approval, construct the docks as shown. A true and correct copy of Mr. Sebek s April 15, 2015, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit H. Appellant Chandler was provided with a copy of Mr. Sebek s April 15, 2015, letter by Karl Burgess of the DNR via on April 28, Appellant Chandler then forwarded the April 15, 2015, letter to Gary Plumbley, Director of Development Services of the Metropolitan Planning Commission, via on April 28, A true and correct copy of Appellant Chandler s April 28, 2015, is attached hereto as Exhibit I. On April 29, 2015, counsel for Appellants sent to Mr. Burgess a letter referencing Mr. Sebek s April 15, 2015, letter. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit J. On May 18, 2015, Appellants requested, via letter, that the Chatham County Board of Commissioners (the Commission ) direct Mr. Sebek to withdraw his determination and notify the DNR that the dock would violate the Chatham County Zoning Ordinance. A true and correct copy of Appellants May 18, 2015, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit K. The Chatham County Board of Commissioners denied Appellants request and did not take up the matter. Appellants then filed suit against DBL, Chatham County, and Robert Sebek in the Superior Court of Chatham County seeking mandamus, a declaratory judgment, and temporary and permanent injunctive relief. During the June 2, 2015, hearing on Appellants request for a temporary restraining order, which was denied, DBL and Chatham County raised Appellants failure to 3
4 appeal Mr. Sebek s determination as a defense to Appellants Complaint. The following day, Appellants filed their Zoning Board of Appeals Application (the Appeal ). As discussed in more detail below, the Appeal must be dismissed because (i) the Appeal is untimely; and (ii) Appellants lack standing to challenge Mr. Sebek s determination. Further, aside from the jurisdictional deficiencies of the Appeal, the Appeal also fails because Mr. Sebek properly determined that the Application does not violate any zoning ordinance. II. Argument and Citation of Authorities A. The Appeal is Time Barred Mr. Sebek s determination of whether the Application violates any zoning ordinance was made on May 27, 2014, which was 461 days prior to the date that Appellants filed the Appeal. Because such a period of time exceeds that permitted by Chatham County Zoning Ordinance , the Appeal is untimely. Chatham County Zoning Ordinance makes clear that an appeal must be filed no later than thirty (30) days after the date of notification 1 of the order, decision, or determination appealed from. Consequently, the limitations period for seeking review of Mr. Sebek s determination expired almost one year prior to the date of the Appeal. This interpretation is consistent with the instructions on the face of the form application for appeal which reads: An appeal must be filed no later than 30 days after the determination was rendered by the Zoning Administrator. Appellants contend that the ZBA should hear their Appeal because i) they could not appeal until after seeking a rescission action from the Commission; and (ii) they were unaware of the [the April 15, 2015, letter] until a date following the May 22, 2015 meeting of the Chatham County Commission. First, Appellants failed attempt to persuade the Commission to 1 It is DBL s position that Chatham County Zoning Ordinance does not require actual notice in order to trigger the thirty day limitation period. 4
5 compel Mr. Sebek to withdraw his determination is irrelevant to the issue of whether the Appeal was timely filed. The Commission does not have the authority to compel the Zoning Administrator to change his position or rescind a determination. Appellants pursuit of such a resolution was in error. The Chatham County Zoning Ordinance unequivocally states that the ZBA has full and complete jurisdiction to review the determinations of the Zoning Administrator. See Chatham County Zoning Ordinance Second, Mr. Sebek s determination was made on May 27, 2014, and Appellants were aware this determination on February 20, 2015, at the latest. (Ex. E). Therefore, the Appeal is untimely. Despite the fact that Mr. Sebek s April 15, 2015, letter is a mere reaffirmation of his May 27, 2014, letter, Appellants seem to contend that the April 15, 2015, letter constitutes a separate determination from which they may appeal. Even if, however, Mr. Sebek s April 15, 2015, letter was an independent determination, the Appeal is still untimely. Appellant Chandler received a copy of the April 15, 2015, letter on April 28, (Ex. I). Appellants counsels April 29, 2015, letter to Mr. Burgess further confirms that Appellants were aware of the April 15, 2015, letter on that date. As such, the latest date that the Appeal could have been filed under the most lenient interpretation of the Chatham County Zoning Ordinance was May 29, Thus, Appellants Appeal must be dismissed as untimely. B. Appellants Lack Standing to Appeal the Determination of Mr. Sebek In addition to being time barred by their failure to file a timely appeal, Appellants lack standing to seek review of Mr. Sebek s determination. Georgia law is clear that a landowner complaining to be aggrieved by a zoning decision must: 1) have a substantial interest that is affected by the government action; and 2) show that the government action would cause a special damage or injury not common to all property owners who are similarly situated. Moore v. Maloney, 253 Ga. 504, 506, 321 S.E.2d 335 (1984). Waterfront property owners have a right to 5
6 equitable access to tidelands and tidal waters that adjoin their property. Dorroh v. McCarthy, 265 Ga. 750, 751, 462 S.E.2d 708, 710 (1995). When the shoreline at issue is relatively straight, equitable access is achieved by extending the property lines straight out to the navigable waters in order to allocate access among riparian owners. Id. Because of these rights, Georgia courts have found adjacent landowners to have standing to challenge a dock permit in factual scenarios where the dock at issue obstructed the view of the water, impeded access, hampered the ability to build a dock, and/or diminished property values. See DBL, Inc. v. Carson, 262 Ga. App. 252, 255, 585 S.E.2d 87, 91 (2003)(finding that property owners had standing to contest a dock because the dock obstructed their view of the water within the extended property lines and impeding one landowner s access to his boat); Hitch v. Vasarhelyi, 285 Ga. 627, 630, 680 S.E.2d 411, 414 (2009)(finding that property owners had standing to contest issuance of a dock permit because property owners demonstrated that they would suffer special damages or injury because their view would be impaired, their ability to build a dock would be hampered, and the value of their property would be diminished). Here, the Appellants cannot demonstrate that they will suffer a special damage or injury not common to all property owners who are similarly situated. First, Appellants James Martin, Sally Chandler, and Dennis Chandler do not own property adjacent to either of the lots owned by DBL. See tax map and deeds of record attached hereto as Exhibit L. Thus, they cannot legitimately assert that the use and enjoyment of their property will be impacted by the modification of DBL s dock. Second, the Farthings use and enjoyment of their property, which is adjacent to Lot 32, will not suffer special damage. The Farthings purchased their lot on June 9, (Ex. L). As noted above, DBL s proposal is for the modification and expansion of a dock that originates on Lot 33 and has been operated as a marina for well over a decade. If the 6
7 Application is approved, the dock will expand within the extended property line of Lot 33, but will not touch Lot 32. The expansion of this dock into the extended property line of Lot 32 consists solely of three floating docks that terminate no less than 10ft from Lot 32 s extended property line and more than 50ft from the Farthings dock. (Ex. A). The expansion will not impair the Farthings view within their extended property line, will not impede the Farthings access to their dock, and will not otherwise block the tidewaters to which the Farthings are entitled equitable access. Further, the modification of the existing, commercial marina will not impair the value of the Farthings property. Furthermore, Turner s Creek has at least three such public marinas and a charter fishing business in close proximity. See attached aerial photo of Tuner s Creek attached hereto as Exhibit M. As such, the Farthings cannot demonstrate that they will suffer a special damage or injury not common to all property owners who are similarly situated along waterfronts containing commercial marinas. Consequently, the Appellants lack standing to seek the ZBA s review of Mr. Sebek s determination that DBL s proposed dock modification does not violate any zoning ordinance. C. The Zoning Administrator Properly Determined that the Application does Not Violate any Zoning Ordinance Mr. Sebek properly determined that DBL s Application does not violate any zoning ordinance because there is no zoning ordinance that is applicable to the Application. As noted above, no portion of DBL s proposed dock modification touches Lot 32. Rather, the portions of the dock that contain an upland component originate from Lot 33. The portions of the proposed dock that fall within the extended property lines of lot 32 will attach only to state-owned tidewater beds. As discussed in more detail below, Chatham County lacks authority to regulate the use of state-owned tidewater beds and, thus, the use restrictions applicable to Lot 32 are not applicable to state-owned water bottoms within the extended property lines of Lot 32. 7
8 a. The Ordinance is Preempted The Constitution of the State of Georgia authorizes counties to adopt clearly reasonable ordinances, resolutions, or regulations regarding matters for which no provision has been made by general law, but this authorization cannot be construed to extend to matters which the General Assembly has preempted by enacting laws on the matter. Ga. Const. Art. IX, II, Par. I. Thus, statutes of the state legislature control over those of a local government. Sturm, Ruger & Co. v. City of Atlanta, 253 Ga. App. 713, 717, 560 S.E.2d 525 (2002). Preemption may be express, implied, or by conflict. GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. Coweta Cnty., 288 Ga. App. 748, 748, 655 S.E.2d 346 (2007). Exceptions to the rule of state preemption exist only when the state law authorizes the local government to act and the local ordinance does not conflict with the general law. Ga. Const. Art. III, VI, Par. IV. In the absence of an express grant of authority from the state, a local government cannot regulate a matter which is regulated by the state. Id. For instance, in Franklin County v. Fieldale Farms Corp., Franklin County promulgated a land disposal ordinance which attempted to regulate the disposal of industrial, hazardous, and biomedical waste, which are matters regulated by state water quality control legislation. 270 Ga. 272, 507 S.E. 2d 460 (1998). Fieldale Farms then sought and obtained a declaratory judgment that Franklin County s ordinance was preempted by state law. Id. at 273. In affirming the decision of the trial court, the Fieldal Farms Court held noted that the applicable state law granted the state the responsibility for overseeing water quality without mentioning the role of local governments, directed the Board of Natural Resources to adopt regulations and requirements, and required the state EPD to approve permits. Id. at 277. The Fieldale Farms Court then found that that General Assembly did not intend to give counties concurrent jurisdiction and held that the local ordinance was impliedly preempted by the state law. Id. 8
9 Here, the Chatham County Zoning Ordinance attempts to govern the use of coastal tidewater beds by construing such river beds to be within the boundaries of the County s zoning districts. There is no Georgia law, however, which authorizes local governments to regulate the use of coastal tidewater beds. Regarding tidewaters in general, the General Assembly has declared: the State of Georgia, as sovereign, is trustee of the rights of the people of the state to use and enjoy all tidewaters which are capable of use for fishing, passage, navigation, commerce, and transportation, pursuant to the common law public trust doctrine. Therefore, the General Assembly declares that the protection of tidewaters for use by the state and its citizens has more than local significance, is of equal importance to all citizens of the state, is of state-wide concern, and, consequently, is properly a matter for regulation under the police powers of the state. OCGA (emphasis supplied). Regarding the use of coastal tidewater beds specifically, the General Assembly has declared that the management of the coastal marshlands has more than local significance, is of equal importance to all citizens of the state, is of state-wide concern, and consequently is properly a matter for regulation under the police power of the state. OCGA (emphasis supplied)(the CMPA). Additionally, like the state law at issue in Fieldale Farms, the CMPA directs the DNR to enforce the CMPA and to promulgate rules and regulations regarding the construction or location of any structure on or over coastal tidewater beds. See OCGA Thus, like the local ordinance at issue in Fieldale Farms that was impliedly preempted by the language and legislative history of the state law, the portion of the Chatham County Zoning Ordinance which seeks to regulate the use of coastal tidewater beds is preempted by CMPA. Consequently, the Zoning Administrator properly determined that DBL s proposal is not violative of any zoning ordinance. 9
10 b. State-owned Tidewater Beds are Immune from Local Zoning Regulations In addition to being preempted by the CMPA and OCGA , the Chatham County Zoning Ordinance cannot be interpreted to include state-owned tidewater beds because the State of Georgia is immune from local zoning ordinances. The State of Georgia holds fee simple title to the beds of all tidewaters within the State up to the high water mark. Black v. Floyd, 280 Ga. 525, 630 S.E.2d 382 (2006); OCGA It is an established principle of Georgia law that property owned by the state, and used for a governmental purpose, is exempt from municipal zoning regulation. Evans v. Just Open Government, 242 Ga. 834, 251 S.E.2d 546 (1979). Therefore, the use restrictions applicable to Lot 32 cannot be extended to property that is owned by the State of Georgia. III. Conclusion As discussed in detail above, Appellants failed to timely appeal the Zoning Administrator s determination that DBL s Application does violate any zoning ordinance. Further, Appellants lack standing to seek review of said determination. Consequently, the ZBA is without jurisdiction to hear this Appeal. Moreover, assuming, arguendo, that these jurisdiction defects were not fatal to Appellants Appeal, Mr. Sebek s determination that DBL s Application does not violate any zoning ordinance was properly made because Chatham County lacks the authority to regulate the use of state-owned tidewater beds. Therefore, DBL respectfully requests that the ZBA dismiss the Appeal or, in the alternative, affirm the determination of the Zoning Administrator. 2 2 A granting of the Appeal would challenge the protections guaranteed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Georgia, and DBL hereby reserves said rights. 10
COMMISSIONERS OF OXFORD. Ordinance No. 1801
COMMISSIONERS OF OXFORD Ordinance No. 1801 INTRODUCED BY: DATE: AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF OXFORD TO AMEND CHAPTER 11 OF THE TOWN CODE TITLED HARBOR MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE, SECTION 11.12 TO CLARIFY THE
More informationI. NATURE OF ACTION. This is an appeal by Betsey Alden, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80B, from the town's
STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, SS S.UPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET AP-03-076 BETSEY ALDEN, Appellant / Plaintiff L.. TOWN OF HARPSWELL and WALTER SCOTT MOODY, Defendants I. NATURE OF ACTION This is an appeal
More informationWHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners adopted the restated Pasco County Land Development Code on October 18, 2011 by Ord. No.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE BY THE PASCO COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE PASCO COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; SECTION 1001.4 VISIBILITY; 1001.5 NAVIGABILITY
More informationPresent: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, and Mims, JJ., and Carrico and Koontz, S.JJ.
Present: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, and Mims, JJ., and Carrico and Koontz, S.JJ. JOHN L. JENNINGS, T/A JENNINGS BOATYARD, INC. OPINION BY v. Record No. 100068 CHIEF JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER
More informationGRANVILLE FARMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF GRANVILLE, Defendant NO. COA Filed: 03 May 2005
GRANVILLE FARMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF GRANVILLE, Defendant NO. COA04-234 Filed: 03 May 2005 Environmental Law--local regulation of biosolids applications--preemption by state law Granville County
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA DEKALB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Petitioner, v. CITY OF ATLANTA and FELICIA A. MOORE, ATLANTA CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT, in her Official Capacity, CIVIL
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., ) TAI TOSON, ) EDWARD WARREN, ) JEFFREY HUONG, ) JOHN LYNCH, ) MICHAEL NYDEN, and ) JAMES CHRENCIK ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil
More informationARTICLE 25 ZONING HEARING BOARD Contents
ARTICLE 25 ZONING HEARING BOARD Contents 2500 Establishment of Board 2501 Membership and Terms of Office 2502 Procedures 2503 Interpretation 2504 Variances 2505 Special Exceptions 2506 Challenge to the
More informationArticle 18 Amendments and Zoning Procedures
18.1 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATIVE BODIES. The provisions of this Article of the Zoning Ordinance shall be administered by the Planning and Land Use Department, in association with and in support of the
More informationCase Law Update 2012 Land Use Planning Cases
Case Law Update 2012 Land Use Planning Cases tfrateschi@harrisbeach.com Harris Beach PLLC 333 Washington Street Syracuse, New York 13202 www.harrisbeach.com Municipal Immunity To Zoning Town of Fenton
More informationSTAFF REPORT FROM: BRUCE BUCKINGHAM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ~
TO: STAFF REPORT HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRUCE BUCKINGHAM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ~ SUBJECT: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 14-04 AMENDING GROVER BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
More informationDRAFT DRAFT DRAFT BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA ORDINANCE NUMBER XXXX
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA ORDINANCE NUMBER XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, REGARDING ANCHORING AND MOORING; CREATING ARTICLE 1, ANCHORING
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., ) TAI TOSON, ) JEFFREY HUONG, ) JOHN LYNCH, ) MICHAEL NYDEN, and ) JAMES CHRENCIK ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil Action No. 2007
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., ) And EDWARD A. STONE, ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Appeal No. A07A2036 ) COWETA COUNTY, GEORGIA ) ) Appellee ) APPELLANTS REPLY BRIEF Coweta County
More information(3) "Conservation district" means a conservation district authorized under part 93.
PART 91, SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1994 PA 451, AS AMENDED (Includes all amendments through 8-1-05) 324.9101 Definitions; A to W.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Georgia. GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., JAMES CHRENCIK, MICHAEL NYDEN, AND JEFFREY HUONG, Appellants
In the Supreme Court of Georgia GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., JAMES CHRENCIK, MICHAEL NYDEN, AND JEFFREY HUONG, Appellants v. CITY OF ATLANTA, CITY OF ROSWELL, AND CITY OF SANDY SPRINGS, Appellees No. S08A1911
More informationHOLDING TANK ORDINANCE. Approved March 9, 1998
HOLDING TANK ORDINANCE Approved March 9, 1998 SECTION I. Title This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the Town of Skowhegan, Maine, Holding Tank Ordinance, and will be referred to as this Ordinance.
More informationCompiler's note: The repealed sections pertained to definitions and soil erosion and sedimentation control program.
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT) Act 451 of 1994 PART 91 SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 324.9101 Definitions; A to W. Sec. 9101. (1) "Agricultural practices" means all
More information- *. - : I -. Docket No. AP I. NATURE OF ACTION. This is an appeal by Normand Lauze, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80B, from the
STATE OF MAINE Cumberland, ss SUPERIOR COURT " -..- Civil Action - *. - : I -. Docket No. AP-05-079 NORMAND LAUZE, Appellant / Plaintiff DECISION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (M.R.Civ.P. 80B) TOWN OF HARPSWELL,
More informationIN THE COURTOF APPEALS STATE OF GEORGIA. MOTION AGAINST APPELLANTS PURSUANT TO RULE 7(e)
Case A19A0862 Filed 01/04/2019 Page 1 of 5 IN THE COURTOF APPEALS STATE OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., et al., Appellants, Case No.: A19A0862 v. Thomas C. Bordeaux, Jr., Appellee. MOTION AGAINST APPELLANTS
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF GEORGIA CASE NO: S16A0112. COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, et al., APPELLANTS, v.
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF GEORGIA CASE NO: S16A0112 COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, et al., APPELLANTS, v. GREGORY D. COUNTRYMAN, S.R. individually and as Elected Marshal of Muscogee County, and VIVIAN BISHOP,
More informationAppendix G. Harbor Management Ordinance
Appendix G Table of Contents Section Page 101 Purpose -------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 201 Authority ------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationARTICLE 2. ADMINISTRATION CHAPTER 20 AUTHORITY OF REVIEWING/DECISION MAKING BODIES AND OFFICIALS Sections: 20.1 Board of County Commissioners.
Article. ADMINISTRATION 0 0 ARTICLE. ADMINISTRATION CHAPTER 0 AUTHORITY OF REVIEWING/DECISION MAKING BODIES AND OFFICIALS Sections: 0. Board of County Commissioners. 0. Planning Commission. 0. Board of
More informationDecided: November 18, S12G1905. COLON et al. v. FULTON COUNTY. S12G1911. FULTON COUNTY v. WARREN. S12G1912. FULTON COUNTY v. COLON.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: November 18, 2013 S12G1905. COLON et al. v. FULTON COUNTY. S12G1911. FULTON COUNTY v. WARREN. S12G1912. FULTON COUNTY v. COLON. MELTON, Justice. In these consolidated
More informationIn the Court of Appeals of Georgia
SECOND DIVISION MILLER, P. J., ELLINGTON, P. J., and ANDREWS, J. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed
More informationCITY OF HOOD RIVER PLANNING APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
CITY OF HOOD RIVER PLANNING APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS 1. The attached application is for review of your proposed development as required by the Hood River Municipal Code ( Code ). Review is required to
More informationPage 12 of 19. CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions. hb e2
312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 Section 8. Paragraph (s) of subsection (2) of section 403.813, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 403.813 Permits issued at district centers; exceptions.--
More informationArticle V - Zoning Hearing Board
Section 500 POWERS AND DUTIES - GENERAL (also see Article IX of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code) '500.1 Membership of Board: The membership of the Board shall consist of five (5) residents
More informationPROCEDURES RE: VACATION OF PLATTED ALLEY OR STREET IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF ELKHART COUNTY, INDIANA (As of January 1, 1991)
PROCEDURES RE: VACATION OF PLATTED ALLEY OR STREET IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF ELKHART COUNTY, INDIANA (As of January 1, 1991) 1. Any person who owns or in interested in a parcel of real estates located
More information1 of 14 DOCUMENTS. OFFICIAL CODE OF GEORGIA ANNOTATED Copyright 2015 by The State of Georgia All rights reserved.
Page 1 36-31-1. Legislative intent 1 of 14 DOCUMENTS O.C.G.A. 36-31-1 (2015) It is declared to be the intention of the General Assembly to prescribe certain minimum standards which must exist as a condition
More informationCOpy IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COU T\ STATE OF GEORGIA ORDER DENYING INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION AND DISMISSING CASE BACKGROUND
COpy F~LED IN OFFICE IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COU T\ STATE OF GEORGIA OCT 1 7 2014 JAMES D. JOHNSON, DEPUTY CLERK SUPERIOR COURT FULTON COUNTY. GA vs. Plaintiff, Civil Action File No. 20141 CV250660
More informationPresented: The University of Texas School of Law s 2006 Texas Water Law Institute. December 7-8, 2006 Austin, Texas
Presented: The University of Texas School of Law s 2006 Texas Water Law Institute December 7-8, 2006 Austin, Texas PETITIONS FOR EXPEDITED RELEASE FROM CCNS HOW ARE INCUMBENT UTILITIES RESPONDING? Leonard
More informationCITY OF NORTHFIELD, NJ ORDINANCE NO
CITY OF NORTHFIELD, NJ ORDINANCE NO. 2-2015 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1986 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, AND AMENDING THE CITY S ZONING MAP WHEREAS, the City of Northfield adopted a 1986
More informationSECTIONS
A PPENDIX C - CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTIONS 21670 21679.5 State of California PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE Chapter 4. Airports and Navigational Facilities Article 3.5. Section 21670-21679.5 21670.
More informationTITLE 14 ZONING AND LAND USE CONTROL CHAPTER 1 MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Change 2, October 5, 2006 4- TITLE 4 ZONING AND LAND USE CONTROL CHAPTER. MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION. 2. ZONING ORDINANCE. 3. FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE. 4. HISTORIC ZONING COMMISSION. CHAPTER
More informationU.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY DIVISION WILMINGTON DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY DIVISION WILMINGTON DISTRICT January 10, 2016 Regulatory Offices w/in The Mid-Atlantic Philadelphia District: (215) 656-6725 Baltimore District: (410) 962-3670 Norfolk
More informationNORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1969 SESSION CHAPTER 1089 HOUSE BILL 1324 AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE LAKE NORMAN MARINE COMMISSION.
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1969 SESSION CHAPTER 1089 HOUSE BILL 1324 AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE LAKE NORMAN MARINE COMMISSION. The General Assembly of North Carolina do enact: Section 1. Definitions.
More informationORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS
ORDINANCE NO. 13-16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DEBARY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF DEBARY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDING CHAPTER 1 SECTION 1-3 CONCERNING HEDGE DEFINITION; CHAPTER 2 SECTION 2-5 CONCERNING
More informationConsolidation of State and Federal Wetland Permitting Programs Implementation of House Bill 759 (Chapter , Laws of Florida) Florida
Consolidation of State and Federal Wetland Permitting Programs Implementation of House Bill 759 (Chapter 2005-273, Laws of Florida) Florida Department of Environmental Protection September 30, 2005 Consolidation
More informationRESOLUTION TO AMEND UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
GORDON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA RESOLUTION TO AMEND UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Whereas, The Gordon County Board of Commissioners recognizes that farming is a large part of the history and heritage of
More informationS13A0137. PIKE COUNTY et al. v. CALLAWAY- INGRAM. This is an appeal by defendants Pike County, its county manager, and
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: April 29, 2013 S13A0137. PIKE COUNTY et al. v. CALLAWAY- INGRAM. HINES, Justice. This is an appeal by defendants Pike County, its county manager, and members of
More informationD. Members of the Board shall hold no other office in the Township of West Nottingham or be an employee of the Township.
PART 17 SECTION 1701 ZONING HEARING BOARD MEMBERSHIP OF BOARD A. There is hereby created for the Township of West Nottingham a Zoning Hearing Board (Board) in accordance with the provisions of Article
More informationApplication For Rezoning
Application For Rezoning Thank you for your interest in Jackson County, Georgia. This packet includes the necessary documents for Rezoning Requests to be heard by the Jackson County Planning Commission
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA. GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., et.al.,) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. A19A0862 ) THOMAS C. BORDEAUX, JR.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., et.al.,) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. A19A0862 ) THOMAS C. BORDEAUX, JR., ) ) Appellee ) APPELLANT S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PENALTY
More informationSurface Water Drainage Dispute Raises Numerous Issues
Surface Water Drainage Dispute Raises Numerous Issues 2321 N. Loop Drive, Ste 200 Ames, Iowa 50010 www.calt.iastate.edu July 17, 2009 - by Roger McEowen Overview Surface water drainage disputes can arise
More informationFIRST READING: SECOND READING: PUBLISHED: PASSED: TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER BY LAND APPLICATION
FIRST READING: SECOND READING: PUBLISHED: PASSED: TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER BY LAND APPLICATION A RESOLUTION TO DELETE IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 13.30 ENTITLED TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER
More informationSPECIAL PERMIT CONSIDERATIONS FOR SOVEREIGN LANDS AND AQUATIC PRESERVES
SPECIAL PERMIT CONSIDERATIONS FOR SOVEREIGN LANDS AND AQUATIC PRESERVES Steve Lewis Tim Rach Matt Butler ISIMINGER & STUBBS 1 (56) SOVEREIGNTY SUBMERGED LANDS MEANS THOSE LANDS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION
Hendley et al v. Garey et al Doc. 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION MICHAEL HENDLEY, DEMETRIUS SMITH, JR., as administrator for the estate of CRYNDOLYN
More informationCABARRUS COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ORDINANCE
CABARRUS COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ORDINANCE ARTICLE I TITLE An ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of CABARRUS COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, entitled, "VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
More informationChapter 5 Administrative and Decision Making Bodies 03/23/2004
Chapter 5 Administrative and Decision Making Bodies 03/23/2004 5.010 Purpose and Intent 5.020 Definitions Referenced 5.030 Applicability 5.040 City Council 5.050 Planning Commission 5.060 Board of Zoning
More informationPRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Pre-Annexation Development Agreement (this "Agreement") is executed between (the "Owner") and the City of, Texas (the "City"), each a "Party" and collectively
More informationOrder Granting Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment on First Claim for Relief and Denying Defendant s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
DISTRICT COURT, LARIMER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO 201 LAPORTE AVENUE, SUITE 100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80521-2761 PHONE: (970) 494-3500 Plaintiff: Colorado Oil and Gas Association v. Defendant: City of Fort
More informationWARREN COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ORDINANCE
WARREN COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ORDINANCE ARTICLE I TITLE An ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of WARREN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, entitled, VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ORDINANCE."
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY0 INTHISc:fl'l~""''OJ STATE OF GEORGIA VERIFIED COMPLAINT
~P.
More informationAdministrative & Judicial Challenges to Environmental Permits. Greg L. Johnson
Administrative & Judicial Challenges to Environmental Permits Greg L. Johnson A Professional Law Corporation New Orleans Lafayette Houston 1 Outline Challenges to Permits issued by LDEQ Public Trust Doctrine
More information(JULY 2000 EDITION, Pub. by City of LA) Rev. 9/13/
Sec. 12.24 SEC. 12.24 -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND OTHER SIMILAR QUASI- JUDICIAL APPROVALS. (Amended by Ord. No. 173,268, Eff. 7/1/00.) A. Applicability. This section shall apply to the conditional use
More informationAN OVERVIEW OF THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT'S LAKE BEULAH DECISION
AN OVERVIEW OF THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT'S LAKE BEULAH DECISION Attorney Lawrie Kobza Boardman & Clark LLP lkobza@boardmanclark.com I. BACKGROUND A. Village of East Troy sought approval from the DNR
More informationARTICLE XXIII ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
ARTICLE XXIII ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT SECTION 23.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Article is to provide for the organization of personnel and procedures for the administration of the Ordinance, including
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
Rel: April 20, 2018 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama
More informationS18A1156. FULTON COUNTY v. CITY OF ATLANTA et al. In December 2017, the City of Atlanta enacted an ordinance to annex
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 4, 2019 S18A1156. FULTON COUNTY v. CITY OF ATLANTA et al. BLACKWELL, Justice. In December 2017, the City of Atlanta enacted an ordinance to annex certain
More informationCHAPTER 2-19 PLANNING COMMISSION
CHAPTER 2-19 PLANNING COMMISSION (Ordinance of 6-20-85; Amended 8-1-85, 9-19-91, 12/16/04, 011906/O-2006-02; 122106/2#O-2006-24; 050307/#O-2007-06; O#-2017-07/061517) 2-19-1 Short title. This ordinance
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 1 July Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 5 September 2013 by
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationCITY OF NEW MEADOWS ORDINANCE NO
CITY OF NEW MEADOWS ORDINANCE NO. 323-10 AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED NEW MEADOWS AREA OF CITY IMPACT; PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT AND ADOPTION OF THE NEW MEADOWS AREA OF CITY IMPACT BOUNDARY; PROVIDING FOR SINGLE
More informationMooring Regulations Ordinance
Town of Harrison Mooring Regulations Ordinance AMENDED JUNE 10, 2009 At The Annual Town Meeting SECTION 1: TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the Town of Harrison Mooring Regulations Ordinance.
More informationLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INDEMNITY AGREEMENT
LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INDEMNITY AGREEMENT This LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INDEMNITY AGREEMENT is entered into as of the day of, 2008, by Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US ("Indemnitor") and
More informationS13A1807. MATHEWS et al. v. CLOUD, EXR., et al. This case arises out of a dispute over title and right of possession of
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: January 21, 2014 S13A1807. MATHEWS et al. v. CLOUD, EXR., et al. BENHAM, Justice. This case arises out of a dispute over title and right of possession of certain
More informationMEMORANDUM. Mayor Ciancio & Members of Town Council. SUBJECT: Rezoning Request for 2326 Cat Tail Pond Road MEETING DATE: March 26, 2019
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ciancio & Members of Town Council FROM: Joseph M. Cronin, Town Administrator SUBJECT: Rezoning Request for 2326 Cat Tail Pond Road MEETING DATE: March 26, 2019 Council is asked to
More informationMERCER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
MERCER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE Adopted 1975 Republished 1981 Updated 1994 Updated 2000 Updated 2009 Updated 2012 By The Board of Mercer County Commissioners TABLE OF CONTENTS ENABLING ACT Page CHAPTER
More informationS15A1442. GEBREKIDAN v. CITY OF CLARKSTON. Aster Zeru Gebrekidan filed an application for discretionary appeal to
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 21, 2016 S15A1442. GEBREKIDAN v. CITY OF CLARKSTON. NAHMIAS, Justice. Aster Zeru Gebrekidan filed an application for discretionary appeal to challenge her
More information(4) Airport hazard area means any area of land or water upon which an airport hazard might be established.
New FS 333 CHAPTER 333 AIRPORT ZONING 333.01 Definitions. 333.02 Airport hazards and uses of land in airport vicinities contrary to public interest. 333.025 Permit required for obstructions. 333.03 Requirement
More informationEAST NOTTINGHAM TOWNSHIP ZONING ORDINANCE ARTICLE XXII ZONING HEARING BOARD
EAST NOTTINGHAM TOWNSHIP ZONING ORDINANCE ARTICLE XXII ZONING HEARING BOARD SECTION 2201 GENERAL A. Appointment. 1. The Zoning Hearing Board shall consist of three (3) residents of the Township appointed
More informationSECTION 9. FEEDLOT REGULATIONS
SECTION 9. FEEDLOT REGULATIONS Subsection 9.1: Statutory Authorization, Policy & General Provisions A. Statutory Authorization. The Swift County Feedlot Regulations are adopted pursuant to the authorization
More informationS07A1548. DeKALB COUNTY et al. v. COOPER HOMES.
FINAL COPY 283 Ga. 111 S07A1548. DeKALB COUNTY et al. v. COOPER HOMES. Benham, Justice. In its effort to build five residences on ten legal nonconforming lots of record 1 in unincorporated DeKalb County,
More informationSTATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ITHACA CITY COURT : SMALL CLAIMS. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Plaintiff, DECISION Docket No.
STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ITHACA CITY COURT : SMALL CLAIMS THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Plaintiff, v DECISION Docket No. 05-43416 Defendant. Defendant is charged with violation of 9
More informationU.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, GALVESTON DISTRICT REGIONAL AND PROGRAMMATIC GENERAL PERMIT SWG
U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, GALVESTON DISTRICT REGIONAL AND PROGRAMMATIC GENERAL PERMIT SWG-2007-00720 Permittee: General Public Issuing Office: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Galveston District Project
More informationMEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. Among
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Among THE WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, THE ADVISORY COUNCIL
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT ) IN THE OFFICE OF THE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
More informationS12A0200. HARALSON COUNTY et al. v. TAYLOR JUNKYARD OF BREMEN, INC. This Court granted the application for discretionary appeal of Haralson
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: July 2, 2012 S12A0200. HARALSON COUNTY et al. v. TAYLOR JUNKYARD OF BREMEN, INC. HINES, Justice. This Court granted the application for discretionary appeal of
More informationCircuit Court for Washington County Case No. 21-C UNREPORTED
Circuit Court for Washington County Case No. 21-C-15-55848 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1022 September Term, 2016 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
More informationFlorida Senate CS for SB 360
By the Committee on Community Affairs and Senators Bennett, Gaetz, Ring, Pruitt, Haridopolos, Richter, Hill, and King 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 A bill
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CASE NO.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CASE NO. THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D02-100 LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 00-20940 CA 01 MICHAEL E. HUMER Petitioner/Appellant, Vs. MIAMI-DADE
More information[APPLICATION FOR REZONING] [Type the company name] Preferred Customer
[Type the company name] Preferred Customer [APPLICATION FOR REZONING] CITY OF DULUTH, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 3167 MAIN STREET DULUTH, GA Section 1 Application Instructions A. The
More informationARTICLE IV ADMINISTRATION
Highlighted items in bold and underline font are proposed to be added. Highlighted items in strikethrough font are proposed to be removed. CHAPTER 4.01. GENERAL. Section 4.01.01. Permits Required. ARTICLE
More informationCHAPTER 19 FAIR HOUSING
CHAPTER 19 FAIR HOUSING ARTICLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS 4 19.1.01. DECLARATION OF POLICY... 4 ARTICLE 2 - DEFINITIONS 5 19.2.01. DEFINITIONS... 5 ARTICLE 3 - EXEMPTIONS 7 19.3.01. EXEMPTIONS... 7 ARTICLE
More informationNOTICE ANNOUNCING RE-ISSUANCE OF A REGIONAL GENERAL PERMIT
Public Notice US Army Corps of Engineers Louisville District Public Notice No. Date: Expiration Date: RGP No. 003 9 Jul 08 9 Jul 13 Please address all comments and inquiries to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
More informationCOMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF BROOMFIELD, COLORADO 17 DesCombes Dr. Broomfield, CO 80020 720-887-2100 Plaintiff: COLORADO OIL & GAS ASSOCIATION, v. Defendant: CITY AND COUNTY OF BROOMFIELD, COLORADO
More informationIn the United States District Court For the Northern District of Georgia Gainesville Division BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO INTERVENE
Case 2:13-cv-00104-WCO Document 14-1 Filed 06/10/13 Page 1 of 8 In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Georgia Gainesville Division BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT ) GUN VIOLENCE, ) )
More informationCRYSTAL CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CASE NUMBER 2015-0167-V CRYSTAL CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC FOURTH ASSESSMENT DISTRICT DATE HEARD: SEPTEMBER 24, 2015 ORDERED BY: DOUGLAS CLARK HOLLMANN ADMINISTRATIVE
More informationINTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES AND FUNDING BY AND BETWEEN PALM BEACH COUNTY AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES AND FUNDING BY AND BETWEEN PALM BEACH COUNTY AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into this
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., ) TAI TOSON, ) JEFFREY HUONG, ) JOHN LYNCH, ) MICHAEL NYDEN, and ) JAMES CHRENCIK ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil Action No. 2007
More informationALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
REL: January 5, 2018 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama
More informationCase jrs Doc 273 Filed 03/23/17 Entered 03/23/17 11:18:05 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10
Document Page 1 of 10 IT IS ORDERED as set forth below: Date: March 23, 2017 James R. Sacca U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION
More informationSUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc RUTH CAMPBELL, ET AL., ) ) Appellants, ) ) vs. ) No. SC94339 ) COUNTY COMMISSION OF ) FRANKLIN COUNTY, ) ) Respondent, ) ) and ) ) UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY, ) d/b/a AMEREN
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., ) TAI TOSON, ) JEFFREY HUONG, ) JOHN LYNCH, ) MICHAEL NYDEN, and ) JAMES CHRENCIK ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil Action No. 2007
More informationFROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Herbert C. Gill, Jr., Judge. This appeal involves a dispute between the Board of
PRESENT: All the Justices COMCAST OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, INC. OPINION BY v. Record No. 080946 JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER February 27, 2009 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
More information19th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA
19th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE MATTER OF: NATURAL RESOURCES RECOVERY, INC. * TYPE III CONSTRUCTION AND * DOCKET NO. 446, 408 DEMOLITION DEBRIS/WOODWASTE
More informationUNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2015 CARL T. KIRK MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 0399 September Term, 2015 CARL T. KIRK v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Kehoe, Nazarian, Eyler, James R. (Retired, Specially Assigned),
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. JOSEPH THOMAS & a. TOWN OF HOOKSETT. Argued: March 8, 2006 Opinion Issued: July 20, 2006
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationCHAPTER 4 APPLICATION REVIEW PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS SECTION 4.1 FILING AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW; INFORMAL REVIEWS
CHAPTER 4 APPLICATION REVIEW PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS SECTION 4.1 FILING AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW; INFORMAL REVIEWS A. Filing, Referral, Distribution and Scheduling. Applicants may file applications
More informationBUILDING PERMIT ORDINANCE TOWN OF WOODSTOCK
BUILDING PERMIT ORDINANCE TOWN OF WOODSTOCK Approved March 29, 2004 Amended March 27, 2006 Amended March 31, 2008 Amended March 30, 2009 1 Town of Woodstock, Maine BUILDING PERMIT ORDINANCE CONTENTS Section
More information