Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §29-3-8, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 161, § 1; Ga. L. 2011, p. 752, § 29/HB 142.)
- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Civil Code 1910, §§ 3033 and 3046, former Code 1933, § 49-112, and former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-2 are included in the annotations for this Code section.
For purpose of notice, see New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gilmore, 171 Ga. 894, 157 S.E. 188 (1931) (decided prior to amendment of former Civil Code 1810, § 3046 by Ga. L. 1958, p. 673, § 2, which changed notice requirement).
- In order for a mother, the natural guardian, to also be appointed guardian of her daughter's property, citation is unnecessary. Campbell v. Atlanta Coach Co., 58 Ga. App. 824, 200 S.E. 203 (1938) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-112).
- When application is for appointment of guardian of a minor child under 14 years of age, other than child of applicant, it is necessary for citation to issue. Campbell v. Atlanta Coach Co., 58 Ga. App. 824, 200 S.E. 203 (1938) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-112).
- It is not necessary to issue a second citation when the first citation of application for letters of administration is for the appointment of one person even though the court issues letters of administration to an entirely different person, as to whose appointment no previous notice had been given to any one. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gilmore, 171 Ga. 894, 157 S.E. 188 (1931) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 3046).
No citation is necessary for appointment of testamentary guardian and a testamentary guardian might be authorized by probate court to take charge of property coming to the guardian's ward from sources other than parent's will, without necessity of citation. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gilmore, 171 Ga. 894, 157 S.E. 188 (1931) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 3033).
- Where applicant has already, by will, been made testamentary guardian, it is a matter of testamentary disposition, and there would seem to be no necessity for further notice. Moreover, the law raises implication that there could be no better selection for guardianship of property of minors coming from outside sources than that already provided by the father in his own will as to their persons and property devised by the will. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gilmore, 171 Ga. 894, 157 S.E. 188 (1931) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 3046).
- Probate court, when selecting a new guardian for appellant, erred in failing to consider appellant's next of kin; because the hearing was not recorded, and because the order failed to explain the reason the probate court selected the county guardian as the new guardian, the record supported appellant's argument that the probate court failed to consider the statutory preferences of former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-2(c) in naming a new guardian. In re Phillips, No. A02A2368, Ga. App. , S.E.2d (Oct. 9, 2002) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-2).
Cited in Heist v. Dunlap & Co., 193 Ga. 462, 18 S.E.2d 837 (1942); Price v. Matthews, 68 Ga. App. 510, 23 S.E.2d 535 (1942); Henderson v. Hale, 209 Ga. 307, 71 S.E.2d 622 (1952).
- 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Guardian and Ward, § 59 et seq.
- 39 C.J.S., Guardian and Ward, §§ 10 et seq., 33 et seq. 57 C.J.S., Mental Health, § 135 et seq.
- Subsequent appointment of guardian as curing invalidity of prior sale of ward's property, 2 A.L.R. 1565.
Necessity and sufficiency of notice to alleged incompetent of application for appointment of guardian or committee, 23 A.L.R. 594.
Priority and preference in appointment of conservator or guardian for an incompetent, 65 A.L.R.3d 991.
No results found for Georgia Code 29-3-8.