Barrett V. Hamby
Factual Background The Hamby property was zoned residential, and he wished to open a shopping mall on the property. The application was denied, and he filed a complaint claiming it deprived him of full use of his property. Legal Issues Presented
Did the zoning of the Hamby property constitute a taking without compensation?
Rule The application of the zoning ordinance to the property in this case amounts to an exercise of governmental power and the rezoning constitutes a taking depriving. Legal Analysis
Hamby proved that there had been a loss that occurred due to the rezoning to residential land use. Commercial development would pose no threat to the health or well-being of the community. The denial
of the application for use of the property violated the Due Process Clause of the Georgia Constitution.
Conclusion
The court ruled that the R-20 classification invaded the owner's constitutional rights and suggested to the board they reconsider the zoning of the property.
