GEORGIA NORTHEASTERN R. CO., INC. v. Lusk

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that under Georgia law, the cost to repair or restore land may be an appropriate measure of damages in a nuisance action
• explaining that the plaintiff property owner could not recover for both the cost of restoring the stability of the riverbank and the diminution of value caused by the destabilized condition of the riverbank
• landowner cannot recover double damages for both “diminution [of] market value and costs to restore for the same injury occasioned by the same trespass and nuisance”
• “Georgia, as part of its common law and public policy, has always prohibited a plaintiff from a double recovery of damages; the plaintiff is entitled to only one recovery and satisfaction of damages, because such recovery and satisfaction is deemed to make the plaintiff whole.”
• “Georgia, as part of its common law and public policy, has always prohibited a plaintiff from a double recovery of damages; the plaintiff is entitled to only one recovery and satisfaction of damages, because such recovery and satisfaction is deemed to make the plaintiff whole.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).