Opinion ID: 4231250
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the first civil case

Text: In April 2012 May filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County in Georgia state court. She contended that she had a “grandfathered” right under the County’s zoning ordinances to continue offering short term rentals on the property, and she sought an injunction and declaratory judgment on that basis. She also argued that application of Regulation 15.35 to her property was unconstitutional under the due process and equal protection clauses of the United States and Georgia constitutions, and the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The state trial court found that May’s use of her property was grandfathered, but the Georgia Court of Appeals vacated that judgment and remanded the case for a ruling on two threshold arguments raised by the County: first, whether May’s action was barred for failing to exhaust her administrative remedies by not seeking a rezoning and conditional use permit from the County before filing suit, and second, whether Georgia Code § 5-3-20(a) barred May’s claims because she failed 1 Regulation 15.35 has since been recodified as § 7.29 of the Zoning Ordinance, but we will follow the parties’ practice of continuing to refer to it as a regulation. 3 Case: 17-11030 Date Filed: 12/21/2017 Page: 4 of 13 to challenge the adoption of Regulation 15.35 (facially or as applied to her property) within 30 days of its passage. 2 The state trial court concluded that May’s action was barred for both reasons and dismissed all of May’s claims against the County. May appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals, which denied her application for a discretionary appeal, and then she petitioned the Supreme Court of Georgia, which also denied review. 3