Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 44-5-87 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 44-5-87 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 44-5-87

TITLE 44 PROPERTY

Section 5. Acquisition and Loss of Property, 44-5-1 through 44-5-230.

ARTICLE 4 GIFTS GENERALLY

44-5-87. Implied trust on failure of specific purpose for which gift made.

If a gift is made for a specific purpose which is either expressed or is secretly understood and the purpose is illegal or from some other cause fails or cannot be accomplished, the donee shall hold the object of the gift as trustee for the donor or his next of kin.

(Orig. Code 1863, § 2625; Code 1868, § 2625; Code 1873, § 2667; Code 1882, § 2667; Civil Code 1895, § 3573; Civil Code 1910, § 4153; Code 1933, § 48-108.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Deed in consideration of immoral or illegal thing constitutes contract.

- Deed executed and delivered in consideration to do an immoral or illegal thing is not a gift, but an executed contract founded upon a consideration. Watkins v. Nugen, 118 Ga. 372, 45 S.E. 262 (1903).

No failure to use for designated purpose.

- When designated gifts were to be made from the proceeds of a sale of property donated to a charitable remainder unitrust, there was no failure to use the sale proceeds for specific charities when no sale had occurred. Powell v. Emory Univ., 268 Ga. 658, 492 S.E.2d 874 (1997).

"Best interest of creditors" test under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(4) was not met by the proposed plan of Chapter 13 debtors because the plan did not account for the recoverable value of the debtor's transfer of the debtor's interest in property given to the debtor by the debtor's mother. An implied trust under O.C.G.A. § 44-5-87 did not exist when the specific purpose of the mother's gift was to transfer the property to her sons outside of probate while continuing to reside in the house, and that purpose was accomplished. Meredith v. Weigl (In re Weigl), Bankr. (Bankr. S.D. Ga. Jan. 18, 2011).

Unclean hands.

- Equity will not declare an implied trust in a case of unclean hands. Morgan v. Wright, 219 Ga. 385, 133 S.E.2d 341 (1963).

Gifts made in contemplation of marriage are subject to an implied condition that the gifts are to be returned if the donee breaks the engagement, which rule applies to real estate as well as personalty; in a proper case equity will take jurisdiction to enforce a reconveyance. Guffin v. Kelly, 191 Ga. 880, 14 S.E.2d 50 (1941).

Cited in Hollomon v. Board of Educ., 168 Ga. 359, 147 S.E. 882 (1929); Morgan v. Hutcheson, 195 Ga. 123, 23 S.E.2d 406 (1942).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Right of parent as against creditor or lienor to make gift to minor child of latter's own services, 44 A.L.R. 876.

Validity and construction of statutes discountenancing donations, testamentary or otherwise, between persons living in concubinage or otherwise sustaining immoral relations, 62 A.L.R. 286.

Gift by husband as fraud on wife, 64 A.L.R. 466; 49 A.L.R.2d 521.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 44-5-87

Total Results: 1  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Powell v. Emory Univ., 268 Ga. 658 (Ga. 1997).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 17, 1997 | 492 S.E.2d 874, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 4164

...upon sale of the property, is the letter of September 20, 1990. Although the letter does not so specify, there is rio dispute that the specified gifts are to be made from the proceeds of any sale. Powell argues that under these circumstances, OCGA § 44-5-87 requires that the property be conveyed to him....
...That Code section provides: “If a gift is made for a specific purpose which is either expressed or is secretly understood and the purpose is illegal or from some other cause fails or cannot be accomplished, the donee shall hold the object of the gift as a trustee for the donor or his next of kin.” OCGA § 44-5-87. The court correctly ruled that as the designated gifts are to be made from the proceeds of a sale of the property, and as no sale has yet occurred, there has been no failure of the purpose to use the sale proceeds for specific charities. Assuming the September 20 letter does reveal the “specific purpose” of a “gift,” as those terms are used in OCGA § 44-5-87, the letter itself shows that the only event that will effect that purpose is the sale of the property. Powell argues that Emory has made an anticipatory repudiation of its obligations under the letter prior to sale, showing the purpose *660of the gift fails. Assuming that the doctrine of anticipatory repudiation applies to a gift under OCGA § 44-5-87, the doctrine would apply only if there is an unqualified repudiation of the entire obligation prior to the time of performance....
...The only evidence of a decision as to what charities will be benefited by any sale shows Emory intends the proceeds to go to the charities specified in the September 20, 1990 letter. Thus, even if the doctrine of anticipatory repudiation is available to show the purpose of a gift has failed under OCGA § 44-5-87 prior to the time the purpose is to be effected, the evidence shows no repudiation. As the property has not sold and there is no evidence of a failure of the charitable purpose of the gift, it was not error to grant Emory summary judgment on Powell’s claim under OCGA § 44-5-87. 2....
...The court also rejected the equitable remedy of rescission because the deeds transferring the property to Emory were devoid of any condition that had been violated. Powell argues the court’s anal*661ysis was error because his claim was a right to the property under OCGA § 44-5-87....