O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A. § 53-12-175 (2019)
Enforcement by settlor
✓ 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 settlor of a charitable trust may maintain a civil action to enforce the trust.
History
Code 1981, § 53-12-175, enacted by Ga. L. 2010, p. 579, § 1/SB 131.
ARTICLE 10 PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS
Annotations
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 15 Am. Jur. 2d, Charities, § 4 et seq. 15 Am. Jur. 2d, Charities, § 171 et seq.
PART 1 CORPORATIONS COMMENT This part was carried forward. It formerly was codified at OCGA § 53-12-120 et seq.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1996–1996 · leading case: Frederick D. Ledbetter v. First State Bank & Trust Co., Tr., 85 F.3d 1537 (1st Cir. 1996).
Frederick D. Ledbetter v. First State Bank & Trust Co., Tr., 85 F.3d 1537 (1st Cir. 1996). “The bank could have sought permission of a court to resign pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 53-12-175, citing disagreement between the beneficiary and the trustee, but it did not do so.”
Ledbetter v. First State Bank (11th Cir. 1996). “O.C.G.A. § 53-12-175(a)(3)(F). Plaintiff's claim that the trustee resigned for improper motives and without regard to his interests could not be disposed of by summary judgment.”
— 53-12-175(a)(3)(F) — 2 cases
Frederick D. Ledbetter v. First State Bank & Trust Co., Tr., 85 F.3d 1537 (1st Cir. 1996). “The bank could have sought permission of a court to resign pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 53-12-175, citing disagreement between the beneficiary and the trustee, but it did not do so.”
Ledbetter v. First State Bank (11th Cir. 1996). “O.C.G.A. § 53-12-175(a)(3)(F). Plaintiff's claim that the trustee resigned for improper motives and without regard to his interests could not be disposed of by summary judgment.”
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.