Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, GETTR, Truth Social, Twitter
The landmark Sea Island Road case moves to the GA Court of Appeals.
The Georgia Record reported on this case in an article by local resident Daniel Parshley earlier this year.
Southeast Georgia Struggling To Keep Its Parks, Roads, And Wetlands
Sea Island resident Jane Fraser initially filed the lawsuits as the interested party in March. Fraser’s attorney’s legal argument starts with documents going back to 1768, the island’s original plat given by the King of England to James MacKay — called Long Island at the time — and following the island’s ownership through several changes of hands until it was sold by the original Sea Island Co. to Sea Island Acquisitions, LLC, in 2010 after filing for bankruptcy, writes The Brunswick News.
Among other arguments, the lawsuits claim Glynn County did not have the right to abandon the roads in 2004 as they were still in public use and that some of them are the subject of reversionary clauses to the original owner's heirs.
Glynn County Superior Court Judge Lane, and now repeated in a brief by Sea Island, found that roads could be abandoned for any public purpose but that Fraser has standing to move ahead in the Properties case. Lawyers for Sea Island disagreed and have asked the Court of Appeals to accept the case.
The abandonment statute and ordinance (at the time) both required a showing that the road had ceased to be used by the public such that is did not provide a substantial public benefit. It is still used daily by citizens.
In 2010, the statute, 32-7-2(b) was amended to add broader public interest abandonment language that mirrors Lane’s understanding. But, it wasn’t in place when the abandonment occurred in 2004.
Judge Lane ruled against plaintiff Fraser in the Glynn County case, which is being appealed by Fraser.
There are three parts to the lawsuit: first against Glynn County for not keeping public roads open; second on State Properties law; third against Sea Island. All three were to be heard together but the Court did not agree to that.
