O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 53-7-10 (2019)

Allowable defenses; generally

✓ 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

(a) For purposes of this article, the term ‘‘personal representative’’ includes temporary administrators. (b) When an action is brought against a personal representative in that person’s representative capacity, the personal representative may make the following defenses: (1) That person does not occupy the position of personal representative, as alleged; (2) That no assets have come into the hands of the personal representative; (3) That all assets coming into the hands of the personal representative have been fully administered; (4) That all assets coming into the hands of the personal representative have been fully administered except those necessary to satisfy debts of a greater priority; (5) That the personal representative has fully administered the assets that came into the personal representative’s hands; or (6) That, pending the action, the letters testamentary or of administration have been revoked and the administration committed to

another to whom all the assets that came into the personal representative’s hands have been delivered.

History

Code 1981, § 53-7-10, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 504, § 10.

Annotations

COMMENT This section carries forward the substance of former OCGA Sec. 53-7-48. Although temporary administrators are not included in the term ‘‘personal representative’’ as it is defined in Code Section 53-1-2, subsection (b) provides that temporary administrators are subject to this Article. JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 53-7-48 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Defense properly raised. - Stepparent was entitled to raise in an appeal the question of whether a homeplace came into the stepparent’s hands as the personal representative of a decedent’ mother’s estate in the course of asserting the defense that the stepparent had in fact administered the estate properly because the probate court made a finding of fact that the stepparent, as the personal representative of the mother’s estate, had

transferred marital property, specifically the homeplace, to the stepparent individually. In re Estate of Thornton, 275 Ga. App. 202, 620 S.E.2d 410 (2005). Full administration of assets. - Award of decedent’s entire estate to his widow as year’s support constituted full administration of decedent’s estate, and executor’s defense of plene administravit against bank’s action on note should have been sustained since the bank had proper notice of the year’s support proceedings in the probate court and filed no caveat thereto. Goldberg v. National Bank, 165 Ga. App. 106, 299 S.E.2d 163 (1983) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 53-7-48).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1988–2005 · leading case: Hudson v. Abercrombie, 374 S.E.2d 83 (Ga. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hudson v. Abercrombie, 374 S.E.2d 83 (Ga. 1988). · cites it 2× “Abercrombie under OCGA § 53-3-23, which provides that the probate court may award expenses to an executor for the probate of a will even if the will is not ultimately admitted to probate as long as the *731 expenses are incurred in good faith.”
Nesmith v. Pierce, 487 S.E.2d 687 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Lastly, Nesmith claims the probate court erred in denying her petition for attorney fees under OCGA § 53-7-10. This Code section states that an executor is authorized to provide competent legal counsel for the estate according to the needs of the estate he represents.”
In re Est. of Thornton, 620 S.E.2d 410 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 53-7-10 (b) (3)-(5) (specifying defenses available to personal representative).”
Glover v. Martin, 479 S.E.2d 467 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 12× “Appellant Glover contends the superior court erred in applying OCGA § 53-7-10 to the case instead of OCGA § 53-3-23.”
Baggett v. Baggett, 608 S.E.2d 688 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Over 16 years later in January 2003, Baggett petitioned the probate court to award him an executor’s commission pursuant to former OCGA § 53-6-140 and legal expenses incurred as executor pursuant to former OCGA § 53-7-10.”
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.