Alabama Attorney General Opinion 1979-0194

FFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 79- co/94 CHARLES A. GRADDICK 1-41.1 (09‘ ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ALABAMA MAY 16 1919 LEE L. HALE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM M. BEKURS. JR. EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT WALTER S. TURNER CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL JANIE NOBLES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ADMINI IVE BUILDING Ed NORTH UNION STREET MONTGOMERY SEW AREA 1105). •34-MS0 Honorable Claud E. McCoy Mayor City of Lanett Post Office Box 290 Lanett, Alabama, 36863 Municipalities - Annexation City of Lanett Existence of railroad right of way does not prevent two pieces of land from being "contiguous" and city may utilize method of annexation by mutual consent as set forth in Code of Alabama 1975, §§ 11-42-20 through 11-42-33. Dear Mayor McCoy: The Office of the Attorney General has received your opinion request. Your request presents the following question: Does the existence of a railroad right of way along the boundary of the City Limits prevent property bounding the opposite side of the right of way from being annexed into the City Limits by mutual consent? Your question is to be answered in the negative. Honorable Claud E. McCoy Page Two Code of Alabama 1975, §§ 11-42-20 through 11-42-23 provide only for annexation of property which is "contiguous" to the corporate limits of any incorporated municipality. However, the Supreme Court of Alabama has held that neither a river nor the county line nor a public highway is the type of physical separation which would prevent two pieces of land from being "contiguous" within the meaning of Code of Alabama, §11-42-21. City of Leeds v. Town of Moody, 294 Ala. 496, 319 So.2d 242 (1975). It would logically follow that a railroad right of way would not prevent two pieces of land from being "contiguous". It is, therefore, the opinion of the office that the existence of a railroad right of way along the corporate limits of the City of Lanett would not prevent the City from annexing property bounding the opposite side of the right of way by mutual consent under Sections 11-42-20 through 11-42-23, supra. I do hope that this response fully answers your ques- tion. If, however, we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call on us. Very truly yours, CHARLES A. GRADDICK ATTORNEY GENERAL BY- CAROL JEAN SMITH ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CJWsa