Smith v. Gwinnett County

1 Citing case

  1. Turner v. Putnam Cty

    541 S.E.2d 410 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 4 times
    In Torres, Putnam County brought suit against business operators who allegedly were committing several unlawful acts on their property, including "occupation of buildings without obtaining inspections or certificates of occupancy, zoning violations, building code, safety, and fire violations, operation of [a] business in a residential zone, and the like."

    See also City of Flagstaff v. Atchison c. R.R. Co., 719 F.2d 322, 323 (9th Cir. 1983) (city had no cause of action for the expenses of police and fire services against the railroad which caused a chemical spill); County of San Luis Obispo v. Abalone Alliance, 178 Cal.App.3d 848, 858-62 (1986) (county had no cause of action against protesters for costs incurred in its exercise of police power during a power plant blockade); City of Pittsburgh v. Equitable Gas Co., 512 A.2d 83, 84 (Pa. Com. 1986) (city had no cause of action for the costs of police and other relief measures against the utility company whose natural gas lines exploded). We specifically reject the county's argument that "our Supreme Court has clearly held that a county can recover money damages when it sues to enforce its zoning ordinance," citingSmith v. Gwinnett County, 268 Ga. 179, 181 (3) ( 486 S.E.2d 151) (1997) ("Smith I"), affirmed, 270 Ga. 424 ( 510 S.E.2d 525) (1999), affirmed, 271 Ga. 160 ( 516 S.E.2d 530) (1999). The Smith decisions do not stand for that proposition.