Land, water tower dispute headed to Supreme Court

News
Share this Post

Land, water tower dispute headed to Supreme Court

News
Share this Post

Dave Williams is taking his land dispute with Fayette

County to the Georgia Supreme Court.

Superior Court Judge Johnnie Caldwell recently granted

summary judgment in Williams' suit against the county, declaring

that seven tenths of an acre Williams had thought he owned is

actually county-owned property.

The county wants to use the land for a two million-gallon

water tank and filed papers to condemn the parcel, which is next

to an existing 500,000-gallon tank at Ga. Highway 92 and Lee's

Mill road. The plan has sparked protest from neighbors who say

the tank will detract from the rural flavor of the Hopeful community.

After being denied condemnation on a technicality, county

officials discovered a deed from 1894 granting ownership of

the land to the county.

Williams, saying his family has owned the property for

decades, filed suit, and Caldwell's ruling says in effect that the facts in

the case are clear and there's no need for a trial.

Geoffrey Slade, Williams' attorney, said he will ask the

Supreme Court to overrule Caldwell, declaring that the

local judge erred in failing to consider facts that call ownership of

the property into question. If the appeal is successful, the case

will be sent back to Fayette Superior Court for a trial.

"I'm confident the appeal will be successful," said Slade.

There is little disagreement on the facts of the case, he said.

"We disagree on what the circumstantial evidence demonstrates,"

he added.

It will take several weeks to get transcripts of the recent

hearing in Fayette Superior Court and prepare briefs for argument

before the Supreme Court, he said.

Meanwhile, the county could go forward with its plans for

the property if it chooses to. "I don't think that would be very wise,

but we are powerless to prevent it," he said.

County manager Billy Beckett said water officials currently

are "evaluating a couple of alternative sites" in case Williams'

appeal is successful. "The county feels pretty strongly about its

legal position," he said, adding, "We need to proceed with

the tank... as rapidly as possible."

The tank is needed not only for future capacity as north

Fayette grows, but also to solve current water pressure problems in

the area, he said.

In the hearing before Caldwell, Slade argued that the question

of ownership is cloudy enough that Williams deserves a jury trial

to determine whether he or the county owns the land.

Dennis Davenport from the county attorney's office

argued that the facts are clear, the county owns the property and there is

no need for a trial. The county, he said, has "a deed that is plain

and unambiguous on its face."

If there is an error in the deed, the law provides for it to be

"reformed," Davenport admitted, but said in this case there is no error.

Williams' entire case hinges on whether the county owns

the property, Davenport said, and the deed showing ownership is

clear and unambiguous, he added.

"With those principals in place, it's clear that the county has

ownership of the property," he said.

Slade argued that following clear title from 1894 to

the present is not as simple as Davenport claimed.

The county received deed to the land in preparation for building

a precinct courthouse, but a few years later when the

courthouse was built, the county built it across Lee's Mill on property

that the county did not own.

The county later bought the property on which it had built

the courthouse, and then did not object when a quarter acre of

the land now in dispute was conveyed to Hopeful Academy for

a school building.

"If nothing else, that really requires an explanation,"

said Slade. "I would love to bring someone into court or take

their affidavit," he said, but no one with direct knowledge of

the transactions is currently available, he said.

"The issue is not who had title in 1894, but who has title to

the property in 1998," Slade argued.

He also argued that the county abandoned the property and

thus "relinquished its control."

<!--##############

Stay Up-to-Date on What’s Fun and Important in Fayette

Newsletter

Latest Comments

VIEW ALL
Newsletter
Scroll to Top