Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Civil Code 1910, § 3861, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Admission of self-proved will.

- Under O.C.G.A. § 53-4-24(c), when a will is self-proved, the will "may be admitted to probate without the testimony of any subscribing witness." In fact, compliance with the requirements of execution are presumed without the live testimony or affidavits of witnesses; that is, under O.C.G.A. § 53-5-21(a), the affidavit creates a presumption regarding the prima facie case, subject to rebuttal. Singelman v. Singelman, 273 Ga. 894, 548 S.E.2d 343 (2001).

Subscribing witnesses could testify by written interrogatories.

- Child's claim that a probate court erred by allowing the subscribing witnesses to testify by written interrogatories was rejected as even in the case of a will that was not self-proved, witnesses to the will could be examined by written interrogatories. Tanksley v. Parker, 278 Ga. 877, 608 S.E.2d 596 (2005).

Directed verdict for the caveators of a will was improper, although the witnesses to the will had died, given prior testimony from one witness by interrogatory and deposition that the decedent, who was blind, had signed the will voluntarily and knew it was the decedent's will; under O.C.G.A. § 53-5-23(a), this evidence presented a jury question. Ammons v. Clouds, 295 Ga. 225, 758 S.E.2d 282 (2014).

Failure to caption petition.

- It was error for the superior court to direct a verdict in favor of a propounder because pursuant to current Ga. Unif. Prob. Ct. R. 5.3.3 the propounder was required to provide a caption on the propounder's petition to probate a will purported to be the last will and testament of the propounder's mother that set out the exact nature of the pleading or the type of petition, which was to probate a copy of a will in lieu of a lost original; however, not only did the propounder fail to caption the propounder's petition properly, the propounder also failed to make any interlineations or provide the requisite additional information in the petition as required by Georgia Probate Court Standard Form 5 to use that form to probate a copy of the mother's will. Tudor v. Bradford, 289 Ga. 28, 709 S.E.2d 235 (2011).

Propounder who offered a will for probate.

- It was error for the superior court to direct a verdict in favor of a propounder because under O.C.G.A. § 53-4-46, the propounder was required to prove that the propounder's mother did not deliberately discard or destroy the original of the will with the purpose of revoking the will, but the propounder did not satisfy the propounder's statutory duty, and the propounder should have filed a petition to probate a copy of a will in lieu of a lost original, which would have notified the probate court of the appropriate standards and burdens of proof; the plain language of O.C.G.A. § 53-4-46(b) clearly requires that the presumption of intent to revoke be rebutted in order for a copy of a will to be probated, and Georgia law does not allow a propounder to probate a will without fulfilling the pertinent evidentiary requirements, even when no caveat has been filed. Tudor v. Bradford, 289 Ga. 28, 709 S.E.2d 235 (2011).

Cited in Wells v. Thompson, 140 Ga. 119, 78 S.E. 823, 47 L.R.A. (n.s.) 722, 1914C Ann. Cas. 898 (1913); McFarland v. McFarland, 143 Ga. 598, 85 S.E. 758 (1915); Reeves v. Webb, 297 Ga. 405, 774 S.E.2d 641 (2015).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 79 Am. Jur. 2d, Wills, § 21. 80 Am. Jur. 2d, Wills, §§ 829, 880, 881.

C.J.S.

- 95 C.J.S., Wills, §§ 461 et seq., 593, 595, 661 et seq., 668 et seq.

ALR.

- Admissibility in evidence of enlarged photographs or photostatic copies, 72 A.L.R.2d 308.