Court Opinion

ID: 9600010
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:23:02.793329+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:48.569470
License: Public Domain

Clarke, Presiding Justice,
concurring.
I concur in all respects with the holding of the majority. I write only to comment upon Division 1 of Case No. 44495 which held that a *186motel with a 150-seat meeting room falls within the category of a “convention facility.” While it is true that this room could not accommodate the largest convention ever held in the United States, it is also true that it could have very comfortably accommodated the most important convention ever held on this continent — that being the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The Constitutional Convention had only 55 delegates and there was no meeting at which all were present, so it follows that the facility involved here could and may very well handle meetings with triple the number which ever attended the Philadelphia gathering of 200 years ago. There is little doubt however that the quality is unlikely to be equaled at this facility or any other.
Decided June 19, 1987.
Chorey, Taylor & Feil, John L. Taylor, Jr., John L. Schaub, Harriet M. Deal, for appellant.
Willis B. Sparks III, District Attorney, Sell & Melton, Buckner F. Melton, Carl E. Lancaster, Jr., Thomas J. Ratcliffe, Jr., for appellees.
With these thoughts in mind, I take this opportunity to encourage Georgians to celebrate and pay respect to the work done by the founding fathers on this the bicentennial year of the Constitution.