O.C.G.A.
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.
The execution of a joint will or of mutual wills does not create a presumption of a contract not to revoke the will or wills.
History
Code 1981, § 53-4-32, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10.
Annotations
COMMENT This section clarifies that the execution of joint or mutual wills does not in and of itself create a presumption of a contract that the surviving testator will not
revoke his or her will. See Code. Sec. 53-4-30 for the requirements for making a valid contract not to revoke a will. JUDICIAL DECISIONS Joint will was revocable after one spouse’s death. - A 1997 will made by a father and mother was merely joint, and the will contained no contractual language indicating any intent of the father or mother that the will should be consid-
ered irrevocable; therefore, after the father’s death, the mother could make a new will that disinherited her daughter. Oravec v. Phillips, 298 Ga. 846, 785 S.E.2d 295 (2016).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases, 2005–2016 · leading case:
Hodges v. Callaway, 621 S.E.2d 428 (Ga. 2005).
Hodges v. Callaway, 621 S.E.2d 428 (Ga. 2005).
· cites it 2× “In addition, “[a] contract made on or after January 1, 1998, that obligates an individual to make a will or a testamentary disposition, not to revoke a will or a testamentary disposition, or to die intestate shall be express and shall be in... writing.” (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA…”
Oravec v. Phillips, 785 S.E.2d 295 (Ga. 2016).
· cites it 2× “In addition, “[a] contract made on or after January 1, 1998, that obligates an individual to make a will or a testamentary disposition, not to revoke a will or a testamentary disposition, or to die intestate shall be express and shall be in . . . writing. . . .” OCGA § 53-4-30.…”
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.