O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 53-2-20 (2019)

Jurisdiction of probate or superior court

✓ 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 identity or interest of any heir may be resolved judicially upon application to the probate court that has jurisdiction by virtue of a pending administration or that would have jurisdiction in the event of an administration of the estate of the decedent. Alternatively, the petition may be filed in the superior court of the county where the probate court having jurisdiction, as defined in this Code section, is located; provided, however, that, if the petition is filed in connection with a contested proceeding to determine a purported heir’s entitlement to a year’s support from the decedent’s estate pursuant to Chapter 3 of this title, such petition must be filed in the probate court having jurisdiction. The proceedings for the determination of such questions shall conform to the requirements set forth in this article.

History

Code 1981, § 53-2-20, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10; Ga. L. 2020, p. 377, § 1-2/HB 865.

The 2020 amendment, effective January 1, 2021, added the proviso at the end of the second sentence.

Annotations

COMMENT This section carries over former OCGA Sec. 53-4-30. JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under Ga. L. 1958, p. 361, § 1, are included in the annotations for this Code section. Probate court lacks jurisdiction to enforce contract to adopt. - Court of ordinary (now probate court) is without jurisdiction to entertain an action to enforce an alleged contract of a decedent to adopt the plaintiff, and to declare the plaintiff to be an heir of the decedent.

Lackey v. Lackey, 216 Ga. 177, 115 S.E.2d 565 (1960) (decided under Ga. L. 1958, p. 361, § 1). Cited in Fuller v. Fuller, 107 Ga. App. 429, 130 S.E.2d 520 (1963); Waters v. Roberts, 116 Ga. App. 620, 158 S.E.2d 428 (1967); Kilgo v. Keaton, 227 Ga. 563, 181 S.E.2d 821 (1971); Stanton v. Dickson, 240 Ga. 15, 239 S.E.2d 741 (1977); Lambert v. Allen, 146 Ga. App. 617, 247 S.E.2d 200 (1978); Carr v. Kupfer, 250 Ga. 106, 296 S.E.2d 560 (1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 23 Am. Jur. 2d, Descent and Distribution, § 116. C.J.S. - 26B C.J.S., Descent and Distribution, §§ 82, 87, 88. ALR. - Questions regarding rights of inheritance or other rights in respect of another’s estate after death as proper sub-

ject of declaratory action before latter’s death, 139 A.L.R. 1239. Right of executor or administrator to appeal from order granting or denying distribution, 16 A.L.R.3d 1274. Conflict of laws as to pretermission of heirs, 99 A.L.R.3d 724.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2021 · leading case: Baldwin v. First Tennessee Bank, 307 S.E.2d 919 (Ga. 1983).
Baldwin v. First Tennessee Bank, 307 S.E.2d 919 (Ga. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 81A-156); OCGA § 53-2-20 (Code Ann. § 113-201); OCGA § 53-2-21 (b) (Code Ann.”
Drayton v. McIntosh Cnty., Georgia (S.D. Ga. 2021). · cites it 2× “under the laws of intestacy may apply to either the probate court or the superior court specified in Code Section 53-2-20 to have the claim of heirship and quantity of interest established.”
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.