O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-11-13 (2019)

Appointment of guardian or conservator

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The court shall have jurisdiction to appoint a guardian of the person of any child in any proceeding authorized by this chapter. Any such appointment shall be made pursuant to the same requirements of notice and hearing as are provided for appointments of guardians of the persons of any child by the probate court. In the event a conservator for a child’s property needs to be appointed, the court shall refer that matter to the probate court.

History

Code 1981, § 15-11-13, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242.

Annotations

Cross references. - Power of judge of probate court to appoint guardian for mi-

nor, § 29-2-14. Notice requirements relating to appointment of guardians for minors by judges of the probate court generally, § 29-2-17.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 24A-302, pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-6 and pre-2014 Code Section 15-11-30.1(a)(1), which were subsequently repealed but

were succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor’s notes at the beginning of the chapter. Award of permanent guardianship affirmed. - Award of permanent guard-

ianship to the aunt was affirmed because the parent gave no reason to believe that any objection to taking judicial notice of the deprivation order would have had any merit, nor did the parent identify specific evidence that the parent would have brought forward to challenge the earlier

deprivation order. In the Interest of L. B., 319 Ga. App. 173, 735 S.E.2d 162 (2012) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-30.1). Cited in Drawdy v. Sasser, 335 Ga. App. 650, 782 S.E.2d 706 (2016).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 24A-302 and pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-6, which were subsequently repealed but were succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor’s notes at the beginning of the chapter.

Jurisdiction to appoint guardians for children. - Former statute implicitly recognized that courts other than juvenile courts had jurisdiction to appoint guardians for children. 1976 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U76-15 (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-302).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 42 Am. Jur. 2d, Infants, § 27 et seq. 47 Am. Jur. 2d, Juvenile Courts and Delinquent and Dependent Children, § 39 et seq. C.J.S. - 21 C.J.S., Courts, § 11 et seq. 43 C.J.S., Infants, § 180 et seq. 67A C.J.S., Parent and Child, § 366 et seq.

U.L.A. - Uniform Juvenile Court Act (U.L.A.) § 3. ALR. - Parent’s involuntary confinement, or failure to care for child as result thereof, as evincing neglect, unfitness, or the like in dependency or divestiture proceeding, 79 A.L.R.3d 417.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2022 · leading case: In the Interest of C. R., 570 S.E.2d 609 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In the Interest of C. R., 570 S.E.2d 609 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 12× “Because OCGA § 15-11-13 gives the custodian of a deprived child the right to determine his medical care, we affirm.”
Kenny A. ex rel. Winn v. Perdue, 218 F.R.D. 277 (N.D. Ga. 2003). · cites it 2× “Finally, Code § 15-11-13 requires DFCS “to provide for the care, protection, training, and education and the physical, mental, and moral welfare of the child[ren]” in its custody.”
Dunbar v. ERTTER, 718 S.E.2d 350 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “1 (providing that " [e]xcept as otherwise provided by law, an order of disposition in a proceeding involving deprivation, except an order involving the appointment of a guardian of the person or property of a child, continues in force for not more than two years").”
In the Interest of C.c., Child., 314 Ga. 446 (Ga. 2022). · cites it 4× “at 161 (quoting former OCGA §§ 15-11-13, 19-9-6 (4)). And the Court of Appeals’s brief reasoning in that case did not address the Establishment Clause issues that would arise if the government were vested with the authority to direct a child’s religious training.”
In the Interest of J. N., 691 S.E.2d 396 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “Despite court orders finding that the children were deprived and that reunification efforts were not appropriate, OCGA § 15-11-58 (i) (1) specifically recognized that Neese retained an interest in the children sufficient to support a right to petition for modification of the…”
Stephanie Harris v. Clint Deveaux, 780 F.2d 911 (11th Cir. 1986). “The transferring court shall order that the defendant be taken forthwith to the juvenile court or to a place of detention designated by the court or shall release him to the custody of his parent, guardian, custodian, or other person legally responsible for him to be brought…”
State v. Whetstone, 441 S.E.2d 842 (Ga. 1994). · cites it 2× “1, which sets forth the “methods” of commencing formal proceedings, is nothing more than a reference to OCGA § 15-11-11, which provides that a proceeding (in a juvenile court) may be commenced by (1) transfer from another court (OCGA § 15-11-13); (2) as provided in OCGA §…”
In the Interest of N. J., a Child, 781 S.E.2d 585 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 15-11-240 (a) provides in relevant part: In addition to the jurisdiction to appoint guardians pursuant to Code Section 15-11-13, the juvenile court shall be vested with jurisdiction to appoint a permanent guardian *478 for a child adjudicated as a dependent child in…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.