Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §29-4-53, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 161, § 1.)
- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1868, § 1807, former Civil Code 1910, § 3051, former Code 1933, § 49-232, and former O.C.G.A. § 29-2-45 are included in the annotations for this Code section.
Former Code 1933, § 49-232 (former O.C.G.A. § 29-2-45) was to be liberally construed in favor of incompetent ward. Aiken v. Mitchell, 66 Ga. App. 309, 18 S.E.2d 219 (1941) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
Former Code 1933, § 49-232 (former O.C.G.A. § 29-2-45) was applicable to guardians of incompetent veterans of World War I and other persons of unsound mind. Dillon v. Sills, 54 Ga. App. 299, 187 S.E. 725 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
Religious belief of guardian does not render guardian unfit to discharge guardianship. Maxey v. Bell, 41 Ga. 183 (1870) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 3051).
- Suit by next friend in behalf of ward for waste committed by guardian, or recovery of money in guardian's hands, can be brought only in connection with a proceeding to remove guardian and revoke guardian's letters. Dillon v. Sills, 54 Ga. App. 299, 187 S.E. 725 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
- Proceedings to remove guardian and revoke guardian's letters, under former Code 1933, §§ 49-232, 49-115 or 49-116 (former O.C.G.A. §§ 29-2-45,29-4-14, or29-4-15), were proceedings against guardian as an individual, and not against the estate or trust guardian represents; and where guardian was removed as guardian and guardian's letters revoked, it was proper that guardian appeal therefrom as an individual. Bruce v. Dunn, 52 Ga. App. 758, 184 S.E. 361 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
On question of removal, interest of ward governs, rather than that of guardian. Morse v. Caldwell, 55 Ga. App. 804, 191 S.E. 479 (1937) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
Burden of proof rests upon party attacking guardian's conduct. Dillon v. Sills, 54 Ga. App. 299, 187 S.E. 725 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
- Where guardian was removed and guardian's letters revoked, upon rule issued by the ordinary (now judge of probate court), under former Code 1933, §§ 49-232, 49-115 or 49-116 (former O.C.G.A. §§ 29-2-45,29-4-14, or29-4-15), after hearing on guardian's answer to such rule, guardian may appeal to superior court. Bruce v. Dunn, 52 Ga. App. 758, 184 S.E. 361 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
- Where court of ordinary (now probate court) rendered decision revoking letters of guardianship, an appeal will lie from such decision to superior court, though no issue of fact be involved. Teasley v. Vickery, 133 Ga. 721, 66 S.E. 918 (1910) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 3051).
For jurisdiction over removal proceedings where guardian and ward have moved from county of original appointment, see Fouts v. Flythe, 54 Ga. App. 108, 187 S.E. 160 (1936) (decided under former Code 1933, § 49-232).
Guardian's failure to file annual returns was evidence that the guardian's fiduciary duties were breached and such evidence supported removal. Gary v. Weiner, 233 Ga. App. 284, 503 S.E.2d 898 (1998) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 29-2-45).
Cited in Jennings v. Longino, 49 Ga. App. 494, 176 S.E. 94 (1934); Mitchell v. Mitchell, 201 Ga. 621, 40 S.E.2d 738 (1946).
- 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Guardian and Ward, §§ 162 et seq., 205 et seq.
- 39 C.J.S., Guardian and Ward, §§ 4, 78, 80, 81, 255, 256.
- Liability of guardian, or his surety, as affected by agreement by which he limits his control over funds or investments, 102 A.L.R. 1108.
Improper handling of funds, investments, or assets as ground for removal of guardian of infant or incompetent, 128 A.L.R. 535.
No results found for Georgia Code 29-4-53.