This confusion is so widespread that some states, including California and Michigan, have gone so far as to issue official statements informing the public that the requirements do not originate from the state or local government, but from the retail establishments themselves. Georgia could do the same, but relevant organizations like the Georgia Alcohol Dealers Association could also address this issue without any need for government intervention; the intended result would not necessarily be the banning of bags, but the elimination of widespread forced bagging and the notion that establishments need to supply bags.
Politically the mountain west states (Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Utah) are very similar to southeastern states. Both place a high emphasis on local land use control and generally prefer a more libertarian approach to such regulation. But as population increases in both areas of the country, un-checked development is fueling the growth and severity of wildfires and straining the ability of rivers to provide adequate water supplies. Many states in the southeast, including Georgia and Florida, have already recognized the need for state-wide regulations that cross local jurisdictional borders and now Colorado seems to be coming to the same realization. The next steps in the southeast are to pressure other states to adopt state-wide regulations and to foster the growth of regional, inter-state regulations and guidelines.
While the Supreme Court cleared the way for Mapache to challenge title, it still must produce legible documents that clearly show the marshlands and tidelands were conveyed by the Crown. Back in 2006, the Georgia Supreme Court heard a similar case. In Black v. Floyd, the judgement of the lower court was affirmed by the Supreme Court because the landowners could not clearly show the property was conveyed by the crown. They had the documents, but they were so illegible that as a matter of law the court was able to rule for the State of Georgia. The landowners stated that the documents instructed the grantee to drain swamp and marsh “if any such contain herein.” The Court, though, said that even if the documents did say that, it wouldn’t be enough to show that the Crown clearly intended to convey tidewaters.
This is a re-post of an article published on August 19, 2014. It’s one of our most viewed articles as well as one of our most consistently relevant articles. In it we […]
This is an update/re-post of an article titled “Want to See the Milky Way and Live in the Eastern Time Zone? Good Luck” published back in 2013. That article, re-printed below, advocated […]
Last year we reported on a case in Oklahoma that involved allegations by a property owner that an oil company was negligent in causing an earthquake that damaged her house. Oklahoma has, what […]
Sigh. Any hope of MARTA expansion has once again been taken off the table. After several bills were introduced in the Georgia Senate with bi-partisan support to allow citizens to vote on […]
Last summer the Georgia Supreme Court severely restricted the application of a buffer rule along all state streams – a buffer seemingly designed to protect water quality. The Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation […]