Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

196 Ga. App. 255

395 S.E.2d 824

DeKalb County v. Orwig

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 11, 1990

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1990-06-11

Relies on 149 Ga. App. 422 - Ingram v. Baldwin County

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-06-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2016

5 state decisions

30199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1On Motion for Rehearing.

¶2Cross-appellant Gwen Orwig seeks rehearing on the question of DeKalb County’s liability for creating a nuisance by failing to clean up and restore Mrs. Orwig’s residence after the first sewage backup. We held, per Ingram v. Baldwin County, 149 Ga. App. 422 (254 SE2d 429) that since the county did not create the first sewage backup, it could not be liable for damages as for nuisance on that incident. However, Mrs. Orwig goes further and asserts that the county’s subsequent refusal to remove the noxious filth and problems created by that first backup amounted to the maintenance of a nuisance by the county. We understand fully Mrs. Orwig’s contentions on this point, and if she can show that DeKalb County had a duty to clear her home of the problem caused by the first sewage backup (which, apparently was caused by Georgia Power), then she may collect for its refusal to clean up. But the lingering problem caused by the first incident is not itself a “nuisance maintained by the county” unless the county had a duty to remove it. It is simply the result of the first sewage backup, and the fact that it was sewage that came from DeKalb’s lines does *262not make it actionable as an abatable nuisance unless DeKalb had an obligation to remove it in the course of its duty to maintain sewer lines. We assume this will be a matter of proof.

Decided June 11, 1990Rehearings denied June 21, 1990 and July 9, 1990 — Cert, applied for.Johnson & Montgomery, Nisbet S. Kendrick III, for appellant.Gail C. Flake, for appellee.

¶3Motion for rehearing denied.

/196/gaapp/255 · .json · Public domain