Margaret Sprayberry and Velinda Hobbs Appellants filed a mandamus action, seeking to compel the Board of Commissioners of Dougherty County Board to rescind the rezoning of neighboring property. After conducting an unreported bench trial, the trial court denied mandamus and entered judgment for the Board. Appellants appeal directly from the order of the trial court.
1. Although the Board does not contest Appellants’ right to bring a direct appeal, this Court has the duty to determine its jurisdiction over any case brought before it. Fullwood v. Sivley, 271 Ga. 248, 249 517 SE2d 511 1999. O S Advertising Co. v. Rubin, 267 Ga. 723, 724 1 482 SE2d 295 1997 recognized a “bright-line rule” whereby, “if the underlying subject-matter is zoning, an application for a discretionary appeal must be filed.” However, we also noted that this rule applies only if the appeal is from an order reviewing the zoning decision of an administrative agency. “Where a zoning case does not involve superior court review of an administrative decision, the trial court’s order does not come within the purview of OCGA § 5-6-35 a 1 and no application for appeal need be filed. Cit.” King v. City of Bainbridge, 272 Ga. 427, 428 1 531 SE2d 350 2000. Bright-line rules are favored, but “we cannot consider the applicability of the application requirement in zoning cases apart from its statutory basis.” Harrell v. Little Pup Dev. & Constr., 269 Ga. 143, 144 1 498 SE2d 251 1998. Appellants did not file an appeal to the superior court seeking review of the Board’s administrative decision to rezone the adjoining property. Instead, they brought a mandamus action directly against the Board, attacking the validity of the rezoning and seeking to prevent enforcement thereof. “Because the order appealed from in this case does not involve the review of the decision of a local administrative agency, we find the order is directly appealable under OCGA § 5-6-34 a 6.” King v. City of Bainbridge, supra at 428 1.
