O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 44-5-124 (2019)

Custodial discretion in transfers of custodial property for support, maintenance, education, and general use and benefit of minor

✓ 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

(a) A custodian may deliver or pay to the minor or expend for or apply to the minor’s benefit so much or the whole of the custodial property as the custodian considers advisable for the support, maintenance, education, and general use and benefit of the minor in such manner, at such time or times, and to such extent as the custodian may deem suitable and proper, without court order and without regard to: (1) The duty or ability of the custodian personally or of any other person to support the minor; or (2) Any other income or property of the minor which may be applicable or available for that purpose. (b) On petition of an interested person or the minor if the minor has attained the age of 14 years, the court may order the custodian to deliver or pay to the minor or expend for the minor’s benefit so much of the custodial property as the court considers advisable for the use and benefit of the minor. (c) A delivery, payment, or expenditure under this Code section is in addition to, not in substitution for, and does not affect any obligation of a person to support the minor.

History

(Code 1981, § 44-5-124, enacted by Ga. L. 1990, p. 667, § 1.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 274 Ga. 183, 551 S.E.2d 721 (2001).

RESEARCH REFERENCES U.L.A. - Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (U.L.A.) § 14. ALR. - Unexplained gratuitous transfer

of property from one relative to another as raising presumption of gift, 94 ALR3d 608.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2001–2001 · leading case: Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 551 S.E.2d 721 (Ga. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 551 S.E.2d 721 (Ga. 2001). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 44-5-124 (a). Moreover, the record evidence does not require the conclusion that the $200 contributions were intended solely to cover post-majority college expenses.”

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.