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

O.C.G.A. § 29-6-1 (2019)

Judges of probate courts as custodians of certain funds; authority to collect debts

✓ 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 judges of the probate courts are, in their discretion, made the legal custodians and distributors of all moneys up to $15,000.00 due and owing to any minor or incapacitated adult who is in need of a conservator but who has no legal and qualified conservator; and the judges are authorized to receive and collect all such moneys arising from insurance policies, benefit societies, legacies, inheritances, or any other source. Without any appointment or qualifying order, the judge is authorized to take charge of the moneys or funds of the minor or adult by virtue of the judge’s office as judge of the probate court in the county of residence of the minor or adult; provided, however, that notice shall be given to the living parents of a minor, if any, or the guardian of an adult, if any. The certificate of the judge that no legally qualified conservator has been appointed shall be conclusive and shall be sufficient authority to justify any debtor in making payment on claims made by the judge.

History

(Code 1981, § 29-6-1, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 161, § 1; Ga. L. 2006, p. 805, § 16/SB 534.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2021 · leading case: Cross v. Stokes, 572 S.E.2d 538 (Ga. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cross v. Stokes, 572 S.E.2d 538 (Ga. 2002). · cites it 2× “Lastly, appellant contends that the statutory proscription against a guardian who is not the DVA ward’s next of kin being a beneficiary of the ward’s last will and testament should be limited to the property over which the guardian had control, i.e., “only moneys received by the…”
In Re Est. of Robertson, 611 S.E.2d 680 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “1 In certain situations, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs may require that a guardian he appointed for an individual entitled to benefits from the Department.”
Rashawnda Small v. Chatham Cnty. (Ga. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “In turn, OCGA § 29-6-1 sets forth as follows: The judges of the probate courts are, in their discretion, made the legal custodians and distributors of all moneys up to $15,000.”
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.