City of Cumming v. Flowers, 300 Ga. 820

Background

Kerley Family Homes applied for variances from Cumming's 20-foot setback for certain townhouse lots; the City of Cumming BZA (Mayor and City Council) held a public hearing and granted a variance with conditions.
Neighboring homeowners (Flowers, Donovan, and Castleberry HOA) filed suit in Forsyth County Superior Court seeking a writ of mandamus and an injunction to overturn the variance as arbitrary, ultra vires, and an abuse of discretion.
City and Kerley defendants moved to dismiss (converted to summary judgment), arguing the BZA’s grant was a quasi-judicial decision reviewable only by petition for certiorari under OCGA § 5-4-1, so mandamus was improper.
The superior court denied summary judgment and allowed the mandamus action to proceed; the defendants obtained interlocutory review and appealed.
The Georgia Supreme Court held the BZA’s variance decision was quasi-judicial and that certiorari (not mandamus) is the proper means to seek review under OCGA § 5-4-1, disapproving prior authority to the contrary.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper procedural remedy to challenge a quasi-judicial zoning variance	Homeowners argued mandamus and injunction were proper to compel compliance with the zoning ordinance and to enjoin enforcement of the variance	City and Kerley argued quasi-judicial variance must be reviewed by petition for certiorari under OCGA § 5-4-1; mandamus is improper when certiorari is available	The Court held the BZA’s variance was quasi-judicial and certiorari is the exclusive remedy under OCGA § 5-4-1; mandamus and injunction were improper because an adequate legal remedy existed
Whether a local ordinance can dictate that mandamus (or direct appeal) — instead of certiorari — is the proper remedy	Homeowners relied on precedents saying mandamus applies when local ordinance does not provide for certiorari	City and Kerley urged the Court to adhere to Jackson and related cases permitting local-ordinance control over the remedy	The Court rejected the “local-ordinance requirement,” disapproved Jackson and related lines to the extent they permit local ordinances to displace OCGA § 5-4-1; general certiorari statute controls
Nature of BZA’s action (judicial/quasi-judicial vs. legislative)	Homeowners argued the BZA’s action was legislative because it allegedly ignored ordinance conditions (e.g., applicant-caused hardship)	Defendants argued the BZA applied ordinance standards to facts and therefore acted quasi-judicially	The Court held the nature is governed by function; here the BZA’s decision was quasi-judicial despite possible error in applying criteria
Effect of ruling on injunction claim	Homeowners sought an injunction alongside mandamus	Defendants contended injunction was improper because legal remedy existed	The Court held injunction was improper because certiorari would provide adequate legal remedy, so equitable relief was unavailable

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Spalding County, 265 Ga. 792 (1995) (held variance decisions are quasi-judicial but also stated — without sound reasoning — that mandamus applies when local ordinance does not provide for certiorari)
Shockley v. Fayette County, 260 Ga. 489 (1990) (discussed board powers as quasi-judicial and previously treated mandamus as appropriate absent local provision)
City of Atlanta v. Wansley Moving & Storage Co., 245 Ga. 794 (1980) (early precedent treating review of conditional/special use permits by mandamus)
City of Statesboro v. Dickens, 293 Ga. 540 (2013) (certiorari is the specific remedy that precludes mandamus when available)
Haralson County v. Taylor Junkyard of Bremen, Inc., 291 Ga. 321 (2012) (local ordinances cannot, without statutory authority, create a direct appeal to superior court)
Keystone Knights State of Ga. v. Intl. Keystone Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, 299 Ga. 392 (2016) (distinguishing quasi-judicial from legislative actions; substantive labels do not control)
Stendahl v. Cobb County, 284 Ga. 525 (2008) (General Assembly has not authorized direct appeals of local zoning decisions to superior court)
Bentley v. Chastain, 242 Ga. 348 (1978) (noted that variance decisions can be quasi-judicial when applying local standards)
Martin Marietta Corp. v. Macon-Bibb County Planning & Zoning Comm., 235 Ga. 689 (1975) (recognized certiorari review in certain permit contexts)