Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 53-4-47 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 53 WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

Section 4. Wills, 53-4-1 through 53-4-75.

ARTICLE 5 REVOCATION AND REPUBLICATION

53-4-47. Effect of implied revocation.

An implied revocation extends only so far as an inconsistency exists between testamentary instruments. Any portion of a prior instrument that can stand consistently with the testamentary scheme in a subsequent instrument shall remain unrevoked.

(Code 1981, §53-4-47, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10.)

COMMENT

This section carries forward the concepts of former OCGA Sec. 53-2-75.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, § 113-406, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Implied revocation.

- When the testator makes a different disposition of certain personal property bequeathed by the later will, this constitutes a revocation of the item as to this property in the former will. Cummings v. Cummings, 89 Ga. App. 529, 80 S.E.2d 204 (1954) (decided under former Code 1933, § 113-406).

If the testator gave a ring to the testator's son by will, the testator could revoke this bequest either by conveying the ring and giving the ring to another prior to the testator's death, so that the ring did not remain a part of the testator's estate when the testator died, or the testator could revoke this bequest in the will or revoke the entire will. Cummings v. Cummings, 89 Ga. App. 529, 80 S.E.2d 204 (1954) (decided under former Code 1933, § 113-406).

Probate court properly denied admission to probate for a 1991 will due to an implied revocation by the 2001 will, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 53-4-42(c), as the testator's act of replacing specific bequests in the first will with $100 bequest in the later will, and then changing the testator's wishes regarding a residuary clause, from all to the testator's then wife if she survived, to a division into three in the later will, impliedly revoked the first will by the later will. Mitchell v. Mitchell, 279 Ga. 282, 612 S.E.2d 274 (2005).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 79 Am. Jur. 2d, Wills, § 489.

C.J.S.

- 95 C.J.S., Wills, § 398 et seq.

ALR.

- Necessity that later will refer to earlier will in order to effect a revocation under statutes providing that a will may be revoked by a subsequent will declaring the revocation, 28 A.L.R. 691.

Wills: cutting down estate created by absolute direction to testamentary trustee to pay over and deliver funds by subsequent provision, making different disposition, 46 A.L.R. 781.

Conflict of laws respecting revocation of will, 9 A.L.R.2d 1412.

Implied revocation of will by later will or codicil, 59 A.L.R.2d 11.

Probate where two or more testamentary documents, bearing the same date or undated, are proffered, 17 A.L.R.3d 603.

Cases Citing Georgia Code 53-4-47 From Courtlistener.com

Total Results: 2

Harper v. Harper

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-10-02

Citation: 281 Ga. 25, 635 S.E.2d 711, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 3012, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 598

Snippet: testamentary instruments.” (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 53-4-47. A “testamentary instrument” is “[a]n instrument

Mitchell v. Mitchell

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2005-04-26

Citation: 279 Ga. 282, 612 S.E.2d 274, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 1397, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 296

Snippet: the 1991 will as to completely revoke it. OCGA § 53-4-47 provides that “[a]n implied revocation extends