The Marietta journal. (Marietta, Ga.) 1918-1944, 1919-03-28
JUDGE DISM|SSES the
LAUREL MILLS DAMAGE
SUIT LAST THURSDAY
Long Argument From Both
Sides Heard
Case Hinges On the interpretation
of Code Paragraph and Plaintiffs
Will Take Their Contentious to the
Court of Appeals for Review.


ton 4458 of the Code of Georgia, de-
ponds the final outcome of one of the
biggest law suits ever filed in Cobb
County. This Section of the Code
reads as follows:
Right of alienee. The aienee
of a person owning the property
injured may sue for continu-
ance of the nuisance, so the
alienee of the property causing
the nuisance is responsible for
continuance of the same. In the
latter case there must be re-
quest to abate, before action is
brought.
For about three hours last Thurs
day, Colquitt and Conyers, attorneys,
argued before Judge Morris that the
last four words of this section, towit:
"before action is brought" meant in
law and should be legally construed to
mean that where party originally
constructed a nuisance and subse-
uuently sold the same while maintain
ing the nuisance that altho the alienee
or grantee continued to maintain the
same causing damage therefrom that
there was no liability against such
alienee under the law until notice was
given to abate the same and damage
done subsequent to the notice.
Captain Fred Morris and Judge K.
B. Russell, Attorneys, argued before
the Court for about three hours the
converse of this position and insisted
that while notice sh"-'id be given to
the alienee 'bef..e action is brought"
and if such notice was given that if
the alienee failed to abate the null
sance that he then became liable un-
der the law for the damage sustained
within the statute of limitations be-
fore notice was given; that while he
had a right to Immediately abat6 the.
nuisance upon receiving noice If ne
elected to continue the same the law
placed full liability upon him for all
damages incurred because Of his main
tanning the same within the statute OF
limitations; that by maintaining the
same the alienee adopted the acts OF
his grantor in constructing the same
and liability was placed upon. him.
The legal battle between these At
torneys was watched with consider
able interest by several members OF
the Bar and many spectators.
It was the case of l. VI. Roberts
and ]. P. Brooke against the Geor-
gia Railway and Power Company
where the plaintiffs sued defendant
for S153,95O.OO in which they alleged
that they were the owners of the OLD
Laurell Mills Manufacturing plant
erected where Vickery's Creek inter
sects the Chattahoochee River at the
Roswell Bridge. That by reason OF
the construction of the dam fifty feet
HIGH at Bull Sluice in 1902 the back
waters overfowed this manufacturing
site. mill and buildings and caused
the river to fill up with sand, etc.,
at this point until the property was
totally destroyed as a manufacturing
plant It developed from the evl-
dence that this dam was originally
constructed by the Atlanta Water and
Electric Company and it was oper-
ated and maintained by them until
March 6, 1912 at which time they
sold the property to the defendant
the Georgia Railway and Power Com
nanv, It was alleged that the LAUREL
Mills property was destroyed while
the dam and power plant was owned
bv the defendant; that the construc-
+ion and maintenance of the same was
q nuisance. 1t was alleged that the
nlaintiffs gave the defendant IN this
suit notice to abate the same on the
9th day of June, 1917, and the suit
e was filed on the 26th day of June
the same year. There was no special
damages shown to have been done to
the Laurell Mills property between
the date of the notice and the hllng
fthe suit. -,
On the legal construction of the
Section of the Code referred to as IN
sisted upon by attorneys for the de-
PENDANT at the conclusion of the evl-
dence offered by the plaintiff, mo-
ton of non-suit was made which was
sustained by Judge Morris and the
case dismissed.
It was agreed by all the Attorneys
that if the Atlanta Water and Elec-
trio Power Company had been sued
and they had damaged the plaintiff
there would be no question about la
biIity against them.
It is understood that one reason
vbv suit was not filed against this
Company was that they are either
out of business or insolvent.
The case will go by writ of error to
the higher courts and the final out
come will be watched with interest.
The deed of record of the sale OF
the Bull Sluice plant, from the Al
lanta Water and Electric Power 20.
to the Georgia Railway and Power
Company, shows the price OF one mil
r. ava hundred thousand dollars.