O.C.G.A. § 44-13-13 (2019)
Appointment of appraisers upon filing of objections; examination and valuation of property; alterations in plat and schedule; approval and recordation; appeal
Upon an objection being made as provided for in Code Section 44-13-12, unless the applicant shall so alter the schedule or plat or both as to remove the objections, the judge of the probate court shall appoint three disinterested appraisers to examine the property concerning which the objections are made and to value the same. On the appraisers’ return under oath, if either the schedule or the plat shall be found to be too large, such alterations shall be made in the schedule and in the plat as the judge may deem proper to bring them within the limits of the value allowed by this article. Thereafter, the judge shall approve the schedule and the plat as required by Code Section 44-13-11 and shall cause the same to be delivered to the clerk of superior court of his or her county who shall record the schedule and plat as required by Code Section 44-13-11. Either party dissatisfied with the judgment shall have the right to appeal under the same rules, regulations, and restrictions as are provided by law in cases of appeals from the probate court.
History
Ga. L. 1868, p. 27, § 6; Code 1873, § 2011; Code 1882, § 2011; Civil Code 1895, § 2838; Civil Code 1910, § 3388; Code 1933, § 51-405; Code 1981, § 44-1314; Code 1981, § 44-13-13, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1983, p. 1170, § 2; Ga. L. 2016, p. 193, § 10/HB 1004.
Annotations
Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 1983, p. 1170, § 2, effective July 1, 1983, redesignated former Code Section 44-13-14 as this Code section. The 1983 Act also redesignated former Code Section 44-13-13, relating to objections to schedule, as present Code Section 44-13-12.
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Objections not limited to schedule. - O.C.G.A. § 44-13-13 does not provide exclusively for objections to the schedule. The creditor is not required to object to the schedule, if the creditor desires to dispute “the propriety of the survey, or the value of the premises so platted as the homestead.” Alday v. Spooner, 35 Ga. App. 614,
134 S.E. 343, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 1032 (1926). Conclusiveness of return and approval. - A return of appraisers and approval of the ordinary (now probate judge) unappealed from, is conclusive upon the applicant. Thrasher v. Bettis, 53 Ga. 407, 1874 Ga. LEXIS 496 (1874).
An appeal does not lie to the superior court from a judgment sustaining a demurrer (now motion to dismiss) to an application for a homestead. In such a case the exclusive remedy for reviewing the judgment is by certiorari. Cunningham v. United States Sav. & Loan Co., 109 Ga. 616, 34 S.E. 1024, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 271 (1900). Certiorari. - The superior court has jurisdiction to correct errors by a writ of certiorari to the judgment of the ordinary (now probate judge), allowing a homestead. Lathrop v. Soldiers’ Loan & Bldg. Ass’n, 45 Ga. 483, 1872 Ga. LEXIS 262 (1872). Amending petition on appeal. - The applicant may amend the petition by inserting a new right on appeal to the superior court. Young v. N.B. Brown & Co., 45 Ga. 552, 1872 Ga. LEXIS 282 (1872).
De novo investigation on appeal. - When an appeal is taken from the judgment of the ordinary (now probate judge) in allowing or refusing a homestead under O.C.G.A. § 44-13-13, the whole cause is brought up by the appeal, and either party may, in the appellate court, raise any objections or make any motion in relation thereto. Lynch v. Pace, 40 Ga. 173, 1869 Ga. LEXIS 51 (1869); Kirtland, Babcock & Bronson v. Davis, 43 Ga. 318, 1871 Ga. LEXIS 230 (1871). Value or number of acres. - On appeal, it is discretionary with the jury to sustain the ordinary (now probate judge) in value or number of acres for homestead. Crawford v. Ward, 49 Ga. 40, 1873 Ga. LEXIS 303 (1873).
RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 40 C.J.S., Homesteads, § 146 et seq.