Turner v. Georgia River Network, Grady County Board of Commissioners v. Georgia River Network
297 Ga. 306
| Ga. | 2015Background
- Grady County sought to build a 960-acre fishing lake, including a dam, which would flood wetlands and miles of streams.
- To proceed, Grady County needed an EPD buffer variance addressing disturbances to state waters, including wetlands.
- The Director granted the variance amid objections; a separate letter said wetlands did not require buffers because they lack wrested vegetation.
- An ALJ overturned the variance; the Director and Grady County appealed to the superior courts, which held the buffer requirement applied only to waters with wrested vegetation.
- Appellees appealed to the Court of Appeals, which held the 25-foot buffer applies to all state waters regardless of vegetation wresting.
- The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine the correct construction of OCGA § 12-7-6(b)(15)(A); the Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding the buffer applies only where vegetation has been wrested.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 25‑foot buffer applies to all state waters or only those with wrested vegetation | Turner: buffer limited to waters with wrested vegetation | River Network: buffer applies to all state waters | Buffer applies only to waters with wrested vegetation |
Key Cases Cited
- Georgia River Network v. Turner, 328 Ga. App. 381 (Ga. App. 2014) (initial appellate interpretation of the buffer statute)
- Brown & Gallo, LLC v. Judicial Council of Georgia, 288 Ga. 294 (Ga. 2010) (plain reading and statutory interpretation principles)
- Hammock v. State, 277 Ga. 612 (Ga. 2004) (expressio unius est exclusio alterius principle)
- Allen v. Wright, 282 Ga. 9 (Ga. 2007) (separation of powers in statutory construction)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (U.S. 1984) (agency interpretation given controlling weight when reasonable)