O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 53-2-21 (2019)

Filing of petition

✓ 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

Any personal representative, guardian, conservator, committee, trustee, fiduciary, or other person having a status which by operation of law or written instrument devolves upon such person a duty of distributing property to heirs may file a petition for determination of heirship as provided in Code Section 53-2-20. The petition shall allege the names, addresses, ages, and relationship, so far as known to the petitioner, of all parties at interest other than creditors and the nature and character of such interests. The petition shall further allege whether the petitioner has reason to apprehend that there may be others entitled to participate in the distribution whose names are unknown to the petitioner.

History

Code 1981, § 53-2-21, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10.

Annotations

COMMENT This section carries over former OCGA Sec. 53-4-31. For general provisions on the filing of petitions in the probate court, see Chapter 11 of this Title. JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under Ga. L. 1958, p. 361, § 2, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Cited in Waters v. Roberts, 116 Ga. App. 620, 158 S.E.2d 428 (1967); 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).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. - 26B C.J.S., Descent and Distribution, §§ 83, 84. ALR. - Form and sufficiency of allegations of heirship, 110 A.L.R. 1239. Questions regarding rights of inheri-

tance or other rights in respect of another’s estate after death as proper subject of declaratory action before latter’s death, 139 A.L.R. 1239.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1983–2001 · leading case: Suntrust Bank, Middle Georgia, N.A. v. Harper, 551 S.E.2d 419 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Suntrust Bank, Middle Georgia, N.A. v. Harper, 551 S.E.2d 419 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “21 OCGA § 53-2-21, now codified at OCGA § 53-4-11 (b).”

Bishop v. Kenny, 466 S.E.2d 581 (Ga. 1996). · cites it 2× “Rather, “[t]he amount of intellect necessary to constitute testamentary capacity is that which is necessary to enable the testator to have a decided and rational desire regarding the disposition of his property.”

In Re Est. of Diaz, 524 S.E.2d 219 (Ga. 1999). · cites it 2× “2 A review of the record demonstrates that the evidence is insufficient to make a clear and convincing showing that Diaz lacked the mental capacity to dispose of her property at the time she executed her February 1997 will and codicil.”

Baldwin v. First Tennessee Bank, 307 S.E.2d 919 (Ga. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 113-201); OCGA § 53-2-21 (b) (Code Ann. § 113-202).”

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.