Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 53-1-1 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 53-1-1 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 53-1-1

TITLE 53 WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

Section 1. General Provisions, 53-1-1 through 53-1-20.

ARTICLE 1 IN GENERAL

53-1-1. Short title; effective date of provisions.

  1. This chapter and Chapters 2 through 11 of this title, as such chapters were enacted by an Act approved April 2, 1996 (Ga. L. 1996, p. 504), and as amended by an Act approved April 29, 1997 (Ga. L. 1997, p. 1352), and as such chapters may be amended in the future, shall be known and may be cited as the "Revised Probate Code of 1998."
  2. Except as otherwise provided by law, the provisions contained in this chapter and Chapters 2 through 11 of this title shall be effective on January 1, 1998; provided, however, that no vested rights of title, year's support, succession, or inheritance shall be impaired.

(Code 1981, §53-1-1, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1352, § 1; Ga. L. 1998, p. 1586, § 5; Ga. L. 2011, p. 752, § 53/HB 142.)

The 2011 amendment, effective May 13, 2011, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, in subsection (a), substituted "enacted" for "amended" and inserted "as amended by" in the middle.

Law reviews.

- For article commenting on the 1997 amendment of this Code section, see 14 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 313 (1997).

COMMENT

The provisions in Chapters One through Eleven of this Title resulted from an overall revision of Chapters One through Eleven of former OCGA Title 53 that became effective on January 1, 1998. Substantive variations from the former law are noted in the Comments to each section. Modifications in the language of former Code sections, which were made where appropriate for clarity or modernization, are not noted in the Comments.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Application of Revised Probate Code.

- Subsequently-enacted legislation which stated that if an administrator was not appointed within five years after the death of an intestate, then the estate property would be vested in decedent's heirs, and which did not mention anything about divestment of the estate property, did not apply to prevent the probate court from granting the estate administrator's petition to distribute decedent's property even though the estate administrator was not appointed for nearly four decades after the death of the decedent, as the law in effect at the time the estate administrator was appointed had no time limit for the appointment and the subsequently-enacted legislation did not apply to prohibit the estate administrator from being appointed and distributing the property. Williams v. Williams, 259 Ga. App. 888, 578 S.E.2d 582 (2003).

Cited in In re Estate of Ehlers, 289 Ga. App. 14, 656 S.E.2d 169 (2007); Huggins v. Powell, 293 Ga. App. 436, 667 S.E.2d 219 (2008); In re Estate of Wade, 331 Ga. App. 535, 771 S.E.2d 214 (2015).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

8C Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Dower and Curtesy, § 1.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 53-1-1

Total Results: 4  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Bandy v. Henderson, 670 S.E.2d 792 (Ga. 2008).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 25, 2008 | 284 Ga. 692, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 3865

...no wills shall be or shall be construed to be mutual wills unless there is contained in both wills an express statement that the wills are mutual wills." [5] Tommie died in 1994, and thus, any right Bandy had in the property vested in 1994. See OCGA § 53-1-1(b); Hodges v....
Copy

Evans v. Palmour, 553 S.E.2d 585 (Ga. 2001).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 1, 2001 | 274 Ga. 283, 2001 Fulton County D. Rep. 2942

...will. The Revised Probate Code became effective on January 1, 1998, more than two years before Llop's death, and the only exceptions to its application are "that no vested rights of title, succession or inheritance" may be impaired as a result. OCGA § 53-1-1(b)....
Copy

Davis v. Parris, 710 S.E.2d 757 (Ga. 2011).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 16, 2011 | 289 Ga. 201, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 1503

...Magnetic Resonance Plus, Inc. v. Imaging Systems Intl., 273 Ga. 525(2), 543 S.E.2d 32 (2001), citing to McKie v. McKie, 213 Ga. 582(2), 100 S.E.2d 580 (1957). Also, the 1998 probate code only applies to contracts entered into on or after January 1, 1998 (OCGA § 53-1-1), so it would not apply to any contract allegedly made in 1980....
Copy

Stewart v. Walters, 602 S.E.2d 642 (Ga. 2004).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 13, 2004 | 278 Ga. 374, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 2951

...s inheritance. Appellant denied that the transfer was an advancement. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of appellant on the ground that the law does not recognize an advancement that is not memorialized in a writing according to OCGA § 53-1-10(c)....
...intent after the transferor had died to the court, the Revised Probate Code of 1998 requires that the intent to treat a lifetime transfer as a satisfaction or an advancement must be evidenced in the language of the will or declared in writing. OCGA § 53-1-10(c) clears up potential confusion by defining the circumstances in which an advancement or a satisfaction is deemed to have occurred....
...eror within thirty days of the transfer, or in an acknowledgment signed by the transferee at any time. (footnotes omitted.) Radford and Sugarman, Article: Georgia's New Probate Code, 13 Ga. St. U.L.Rev. 605, 617 (1997). Based on the language of OCGA § 53-1-10(c) [3] , the comment to the revised probate statute explains that only written evidence will now suffice to show that an inter-vivos transfer is intended to operate as an advancement against a testamentary gift....
...An individual who qualifies as the executor of the estate subsequent to a lifetime monetary transfer cannot be in breach of any fiduciary duty imposed upon an executor at the time of the monetary transfer. [4] The Court of Appeals' application of OCGA § 53-1-10 to a transferee who subsequently agrees to serve as the executor of his transferor's estate unduly penalizes the transferee who assumes this service, with the consequence that nominated executors may be forced to decline the position thereby thwarting the expressed desires of the testator....
...vancement is declared in a writing signed by the transferor within 30 days of making the transfer or acknowledged in a writing signed by the recipient at any time. [4] The fact that the transferee's acknowledgment may be signed "any time" under OCGA § 53-1-10(c) does not change the fact that an executor's fiduciary duty does not pre-date the term of the executor's service. [1] Under the writ of certiorari, no question is presented concerning the propriety of applying the 1998 Revised Probate Code in this situation. See OCGA § 53-1-1.