Homework
Homework Questions? Ask a Tutor for Answers ASAP
Connect one-on-one with {0} who will answer your question
Answered in 19 hours by:
4/9/2014
VerifiedHello, I'm a moderator for this topic. I've been working hard to find an Expert to assist you right away, but sometimes finding the right Expert can take a little longer than expected.
I wonder whether you're ok with continuing to wait for an answer. Please let me know and I will assist further. Thank you!
Best,
Angela
M. Kennedy, Advanced Degree
Category: Homework
Satisfied Customers: 6,009
Experience: Degree in Science, BA--Soc.Studies, 15 yrs. exp--Gov't work
VerifiedHello, I can help you with this IF I can locate the appropriate GA cases. I do not subscribe to LexisNexis and so I will have to take a little time to see if I can find them on the Web. I have written many briefs and do know how to do this. I will get back to you as soon as possible. When is this due?
Customer replied 8 years ago
Supreme Court of Georgia.
WARNER
v.
REYNOLDS.
Executrix petitioned to probate earlier will after parties to prior will contest agreed that later will was not validly executed or witnessed. Caveator, who was testatrix's only child, filed caveat to this earlier will. The Probate Court, Fulton County, Floyd E. Propst, J., denied caveat. Caveator appealed. The Supreme Court, Hines, J., held that: (1) evidence supported findings that copy of earlier will was true copy of original and that any revocation of that will by the later unexecuted will was part of a single testamentary scheme, and thus, presumption of revocation was rebutted, and (2) statute specifying that the presumption of revocation with respect to a lost will could be rebutted by a “preponderance of the evidence” was applicable to earlier will.
Affirmed.
West Headnotes
[1] 
KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote
409 Wills
409V Probate or Contest of Will
409V(M) Evidence
409k287 Presumptions and Burden of Proof
409k290 k. Revocation. Most Cited Cases
Preponderance of evidence supported findings that copy of earlier will offered for probate was true copy of original and that any purported revocation of that will by later unexecuted will was part of a single testamentary scheme, and thus, presumption of revocation was rebutted, even though original of earlier will could not be found; earlier will and unexecuted later will indicated that testatrix did not wish to leave her entire estate to caveator, attorney who drafted later will testified that testatrix provided him with either a copy or original of earlier will, and there was no evidence that earlier will was destroyed or revoked prior to his drafting later will. O.C.G.A. § 53-4-46.
[2] KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote
409 Wills
409IV Requisites and Validity
409IV(G) Revocation
409k189 k. Conditional or Dependent Revocation. Most Cited Cases
The doctrine of dependant relative revocation, by which an old will is given effect when a new will is deemed invalid if both wills were parts of one testamentary scheme, is one of presumed intent, and it remains the intent of the testatrix that is the crucial issue.
[3] KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote
409 Wills
409V Probate or Contest of Will
409V(M) Evidence
409k287 Presumptions and Burden of Proof
409k290 k. Revocation. Most Cited Cases
Statute specifying that the presumption of revocation with respect to a lost will could be rebutted by a “preponderance of the evidence” was applicable to will of testatrix who died after statute's effective date. O.C.G.A. § 53-4-46(b).
**521 *804 Herald J.A. Alexander, Atlanta, for appellant.
Moore, Ingram, Johnson & Steele, Melissa W. Gilbert, Marietta, for appellee.
*802 HINES, Justice.
The probate court denied a caveat to a will, and the caveator appeals. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Testatrix Marybelle Warner died on October 20, 1998. In January 1999, Reynolds, the testatrix's sister and executrix under a will executed in 1990, petitioned to probate that will. Clinton Warner, the testatrix's only child, filed a caveat. The case went to mediation, at which it was agreed that the 1990 will was not validly executed or witnessed, and never became effective. Reynolds filed a dismissal of the petition to probate the 1990 will, and petitioned to probate a 1984 will, by which she was also executrix. Clinton also filed a caveat to this will, contending that it had been revoked. Each party moved for summary judgment, and the court ruled that there was no issue of fact as to the original validity of the 1984 will. The probate court, sitting as trier of fact, tried the issue of revocation of the 1984 will and found that the 1984 will was the valid and non-revoked last will and testament of Marybelle Warner.
Clinton asserts that the probate court used an incorrect standard of proof. The court found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the 1984 will was not revoked prior to the drafting of the 1990 will. “Preponderance of the evidence” is the correct standard. OCGA § 53-4-46(b). The original of the 1984 will could not be produced. Thus, under OCGA § 53-4-46(a), there is a presumption that the testatrix intended to revoke it. That presumption can be overcome if a copy is established by a preponderance of the evidence to be a true copy, and if it is shown by a preponderance of the evidence that she did not intend to revoke it. OCGA § 53-4-46(b).
<a name="
#HN;F1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[1]
And the evidence supports the court's decision. The 1984 will was consistent with the prior wills of 1981 and 1982, and with the draft of the 1990 will. All showed that the testatrix did not wish to leave her entire estate to her son Clinton, either by will or by intestacy. On several occasions, she expressed her intent to leave her estate to her mother and not to her son Clinton, whom she considered *803 to be primarily the responsibility of her former husband. When meeting with the attorney who drafted the 1990 will, she brought either a copy of the 1984 will, or the **522 original (given the quality of his office copier in 1990 and the clarity of the copy in his files, and the fact that the copy in his files showed signatures, the attorney believed that the copy was made from the signed original of the 1984 will, but could not state with certainty that he was supplied with the original of the 1984 will). The court found that the attorney was supplied with either a copy or the original. There was no evidence to show that the 1984 will had been previously destroyed or to otherwise support the conclusion that the testatrix had revoked the 1984 will prior to 1990.
#HN;F1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[1]
And the evidence supports the court's decision. The 1984 will was consistent with the prior wills of 1981 and 1982, and with the draft of the 1990 will. All showed that the testatrix did not wish to leave her entire estate to her son Clinton, either by will or by intestacy. On several occasions, she expressed her intent to leave her estate to her mother and not to her son Clinton, whom she considered *803 to be primarily the responsibility of her former husband. When meeting with the attorney who drafted the 1990 will, she brought either a copy of the 1984 will, or the **522 original (given the quality of his office copier in 1990 and the clarity of the copy in his files, and the fact that the copy in his files showed signatures, the attorney believed that the copy was made from the signed original of the 1984 will, but could not state with certainty that he was supplied with the original of the 1984 will). The court found that the attorney was supplied with either a copy or the original. There was no evidence to show that the 1984 will had been previously destroyed or to otherwise support the conclusion that the testatrix had revoked the 1984 will prior to 1990.
<a name="
#HN;F2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2] Clinton, however, contends that applying a preponderance of the evidence standard of proof is inappropriate when the doctrine of dependent relative revocation is involved, and that when applying that doctrine, proof must be by “clear and convincing evidence.” He bases this contention on the usual statement of the doctrine; if it is clear that the cancellation and the making of the new will were parts of one scheme, and the revocation of the old will was so related to the making of the new as to be dependent upon it, then if the new will be not made, or if made is invalid, the old will, though canceled, should be given effect, if its contents can be ascertained in any legal way.
#HN;F2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2]
Clinton, however, contends that applying a preponderance of the evidence standard of proof is inappropriate when the doctrine of dependent relative revocation is involved, and that when applying that doctrine, proof must be by “clear and convincing evidence.” He bases this contention on the usual statement of the doctrine; if it is clear that the cancellation and the making of the new will were parts of one scheme, and the revocation of the old will was so related to the making of the new as to be dependent upon it, then if the new will be not made, or if made is invalid, the old will, though canceled, should be given effect, if its contents can be ascertained in any legal way.
See Havird v. Schlachter, 266 Ga. 718, 719, 470 S.E.2d 657 (1996); McIntyre v. McIntyre, 120 Ga. 67, 71, 47 S.E. 501 (1904). The doctrine of dependent relative revocation is one of presumed intent, and it remains the intent of the testatrix that is the crucial issue. Havird, supra; McIntyre, supra.
<a name="
#HN;F3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[3] Former OCGA § 53-3-6(a) and (b) specified that when a will was lost, there arose a presumption of revocation that could be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. However, in 1996 the General Assembly passed legislation which struck this section of the Code and carried forward the same concept in OCGA § 53-4-46; the legislation was effective January 1, 1998. Ga. L.1996, p. 504, §§ 10 & 15. In 1998, then-OCGA § 53-4-46 was stricken, and the present OCGA § 53-4-46 was created, including subsections (a) and (b). Ga. L.1998, p. 1586, § 16. OCGA § 53-4-46(b) now specifies that the presumption of revocation can be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence. This change was effective July 1, 1998, and therefore applies here, as the testatrix died on October 20, 1998. See Sardy v. Hodge, 264 Ga. 548, 549, 448 S.E.2d 355 (1994).
#HN;F3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[3]
Former OCGA § 53-3-6(a) and (b) specified that when a will was lost, there arose a presumption of revocation that could be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. However, in 1996 the General Assembly passed legislation which struck this section of the Code and carried forward the same concept in OCGA § 53-4-46; the legislation was effective January 1, 1998. Ga. L.1996, p. 504, §§ 10 & 15. In 1998, then-OCGA § 53-4-46 was stricken, and the present OCGA § 53-4-46 was created, including subsections (a) and (b). Ga. L.1998, p. 1586, § 16. OCGA § 53-4-46(b) now specifies that the presumption of revocation can be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence. This change was effective July 1, 1998, and therefore applies here, as the testatrix died on October 20, 1998. See Sardy v. Hodge, 264 Ga. 548, 549, 448 S.E.2d 355 (1994).
It is by no means certain that when the doctrine of dependent relative revocation was adopted in this State by McIntyre, supra, that the use of the language “if it is clear” required that the doctrine must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. But even if that is so, the General Assembly has now declared otherwise. Application of the doctrine is one way in which a propounder satisfies the statutory burden of rebutting the presumption of revocation. See Havird, supra at 718, 470 S.E.2d 657. The General Assembly has determined that the burden must be carried by a preponderance of the evidence, and that is the standard which the probate court applied. There was no error in the court's finding that the copy of the 1984 will offered for probate was a true copy of the original, that any revocation of the 1984 will in 1990 was part of a single testamentary scheme, and therefore that the presumption of revocation was rebutted.
All the Justices concur.
This answer is protected
Would you like to ask this question?
If you've already paid for this answer, simply Login.
M. Kennedy, Advanced Degree
Category: Homework
Satisfied Customers: 6,009
Experience: Degree in Science, BA--Soc.Studies, 15 yrs. exp--Gov't work
VerifiedM. Kennedy and 87 other Homework Specialists are ready to help you
How JustAnswer works
Describe your issueThe assistant will guide you
Chat 1:1 with a tutorLicensed Experts are available 24/7
100% satisfaction guaranteeGet all the answers you need
Related Homework Questions
United States. My question relates to the plot of Trollope's
My question relates to the plot of Anthony Trollope's famous novel, Orley Farm. In that novel, published in 20 monthly parts in 1860 and 1861, Lady Mason, who was 45 years younger than her husband, Joseph Mason, was accused of forging a codicil to his will as he lay dying in another bedroom of their home at Orley Farm. She did so because her husband had refused to leave the farm to their two year old son, Lucius Mason, and instead had left the entirety of his sizeable estate, except for a modest amount to support her, to his adult son by a prior marriage. She was acquitted of forging the contested codicil a short time after the death of her husband, and she and her son Lucius continued to live at Orley Farm until he became of age and took over the operation of the farm. Lucius Mason promptly terminated a lease covering some rented pastures that had been held by the son in law of Mr. Mason, Sr.'s lawyer who supposedly drew up both the original will, and the codicil. The son in law then goes through his father in laws old papers and discovers a partnership dissolution deed executed on the same day as the codicil that had been the subject of Lady Mason' previous trial for forgery, and manages to get her indicted for perjury basee upon her testimony given in the original trial some 20 years previously. Trollope was roundly criticized at the time for inaccurately describing many aspects of the second trial of Lady Mason (focusing on perjury allegedly committed 20 years earlier), but I have seen no criticism premised upon the second trial being one that could not have occurred given the time bar of some applicable statute of limitations. So, I am assuming that like the crime of murder in the United States, for which there is no statute of limitations available as a defense, English law must carry no statute of limitations on the crime of perjury.earlieris accused of having accused of having forged the will o … read more
F. Naz
Chartered Accountant
CA Finalist & Completed B.com
2,280 satisfied customers
Directions: Read the following fact patterns and provide the
Directions: Read the following fact patterns and provide the information requested. 1. Your client, Dreamy McSteamy is a popular motocross driver known far and wide for his long black hair, dangerous … read more
Mr. Gregory White
Teacher/Appraiser
1,308 satisfied customers
the quiz that im looking at on the page do you have the an
the quiz that im looking at on the page do you have the answers Probation is an inherent right of one convicted of a felony for the first time. (Points : 2) True False Question 2. 2. The lessening of … read more
Expert
Facts, issues, rule, decision and reasoning in Flatt v. The
Facts, issues, rule, decision and reasoning in Flatt v. The Superior Court of Sonoma County 885 P2.d 950, I need some assistance regarding this case regarding this issues above. Thank you… read more
Legalwriter
Attorney
Juris Doctor
217 satisfied customers
1. State courts can deal with any number of federal questions
1. State courts can deal with any number of federal questions with the understanding that they're subject to review by a federal appeals court. Which of the following must be tried only in federal cou… read more
Chris M.
M.S.W. Social Work
Master's Degree
2,852 satisfied customers
Scenario for Questions 21–23 Jan and John enter into a contract
Scenario for Questions 21–23 Jan and John enter into a contract in the State of Utah. Jan believes John has breached the contract and files a lawsuit in the State Court in Utah. 21. When Pam, a parale… read more
Expert
1. State courts can deal with any number of federal questions
1. State courts can deal with any number of federal questions with the understanding that they're subject to review by a federal appeals court. Which of the following must be tried only in federal cou… read more
Ellen
Attorney
Doctoral Degree
650 satisfied customers
1. In 1968, the ABA resolved that the legal profession recognize
1. In 1968, the ABA resolved that the legal profession recognize that paralegals A. have as much education as lawyers. B. may handle minor legal cases without supervision. C. should have to be license… read more
Ellen
Attorney
Doctoral Degree
650 satisfied customers
In Ohio Name the basic trial court(s) that exist in each county
In Ohio Name the basic trial court(s) that exist in each county (or city) in your state. (Different states have different names for the main trial court of each county, such as Superior Court, Municip… read more
lwpat
Doctoral Degree
15,510 satisfied customers
I like the legal briefs you did before, can you do this one
I like the legal briefs you did before, can you do this one for me also? You have like 3 weeks to get it done. needs to be double spaced. You may use single space in the various sections of the brief … read more
Legalwriter
Attorney
Juris Doctor
217 satisfied customers
1. Describe how the 3 subsystems of the AMerican legal system
1. Describe how the 3 subsystems of the AMerican legal system address different aspects of law. 2. Distinguish between civil and criminal action. What do civil actions involve that criminal action do … read more
Chris12
Self-Employed
Bachelor's Degree
1,064 satisfied customers
Submit a 5 - 7 page research proposal, in APA format, addressing
Submit a 5 - 7 page research proposal, in APA format, addressing the following scenario: Mary Ellis, a widow, lives in a townhouse that she shares with her adult son, William, who does not pay rent. M… read more
Chris12
Self-Employed
Bachelor's Degree
1,064 satisfied customers
I am just having a hard time trying to find out what the following
I am just having a hard time trying to find out what the following cases are about: 1. Burke v. Raschke, 428 F.Supp.1030(D.ND 1977). Is this about equal protection, violation of 14th Amendment? 2. Buc… read more
Jane T (LLC)
Master's Degree
5,402 satisfied customers
Fiction versus Reality In this assignment, you will exercise
Fiction versus Reality In this assignment, you will exercise critical thinking skills. Remember to suspend judgment while inquiring into the reality-based aspects of the fictional courtroom drama as c… read more
Mrs.PhD
Life Coach & Educational Consultant
Current PhD student
259 satisfied customers
Use the table in Appendix B to identify the key participants
Use the table in Appendix B to identify the key participants in both a criminal and civil courtroom. There is a separate column for “Criminal” and “Civil” courts to define and describe each participan… read more
Mrs.PhD
Life Coach & Educational Consultant
Current PhD student
259 satisfied customers
Mr. and Mrs. Green have come to you for advice regarding their
Mr. and Mrs. Green have come to you for advice regarding their estate. They have several questions, which are listed below. They would like your advice regarding estate planning, including a will and/… read more
David Coleman
Solicitor
Bachelor's Degree
97 satisfied customers
Once you start a civil suit .What is the first actuall couple
Once you start a civil suit .What is the first actuall couple of steps in the process with the courts… read more
Rose54545
Second Year Law School Student
Bachelor's Degree
66 satisfied customers
For jane t... Mr. Flohl and mrs greenwood met when Flohl, a
For jane t... Mr. Flohl and mrs greenwood met when Flohl, a mechanic, helped mrs. greenwood with some car problems. A relationship developed between them and subsequently mr. flohl executed a will nam… read more
Jane T (LLC)
Master's Degree
5,402 satisfied customers
Disclaimer: Information in questions, answers, and other posts on this site ("Posts") comes from individual users, not JustAnswer; JustAnswer is not responsible for Posts. Posts are for general information, are not intended to substitute for informed professional advice (medical, legal, veterinary, financial, etc.), or to establish a professional-client relationship. The site and services are provided "as is" with no warranty or representations by JustAnswer regarding the qualifications of Experts. To see what credentials have been verified by a third-party service, please click on the "Verified" symbol in some Experts' profiles. JustAnswer is not intended or designed for EMERGENCY questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals.
JustAnswer in the News:
Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.
What Customers are Saying:
Wonderful service, prompt, efficient, and accurate. Couldn't have asked for more. I cannot thank you enough for your help.
Freshfield, Liverpool, UK
This expert is wonderful. They truly know what they are talking about, and they actually care about you. They really helped put my nerves at ease. Thank you so much!!!!
Los Angeles, CA
Thank you for all your help. It is nice to know that this service is here for people like myself, who need answers fast and are not sure who to consult.
Hesperia, CA
I couldn't be more satisfied! This is the site I will always come to when I need a second opinion.
Kernersville, NC
Just let me say that this encounter has been entirely professional and most helpful. I liked that I could ask additional questions and get answered in a very short turn around.
Woodstock, NY
Thank you so much for taking your time and knowledge to support my concerns. Not only did you answer my questions, you even took it a step further with replying with more pertinent information I needed to know.
Elkton, Maryland
He answered my question promptly and gave me accurate, detailed information. If all of your experts are half as good, you have a great thing going here.
Dallas, TX
< Previous | Next >
Meet the Experts:
Scott
MIT Graduate
5,811 satisfied customers
MIT Graduate (Math, Programming, Science, and Music)
LogicPro
Engineer
23,494 satisfied customers
Expert in Python,Java C++ C C# VB Javascript Design SQL HTML
Manal Elkhoshkhany
Tutor
4,941 satisfied customers
More than 5000 online tutoring sessions.
Linda_us
Finance, Accounts & Homework Tutor
3,138 satisfied customers
Post Graduate Diploma in Management (MBA)
Chris M.
M.S.W. Social Work
2,852 satisfied customers
Master's Degree, strong math and writing skills, experience in one-on-one tutoring (college English)
F. Naz
Chartered Accountant
2,280 satisfied customers
Experience with chartered accountancy
Jaun
Teacher
2,100 satisfied customers
Masters in Business Administration.
< Previous | Next >
Disclaimer: Information in questions, answers, and other posts on this site ("Posts") comes from individual users, not JustAnswer; JustAnswer is not responsible for Posts. Posts are for general information, are not intended to substitute for informed professional advice (medical, legal, veterinary, financial, etc.), or to establish a professional-client relationship. The site and services are provided "as is" with no warranty or representations by JustAnswer regarding the qualifications of Experts. To see what credentials have been verified by a third-party service, please click on the "Verified" symbol in some Experts' profiles. JustAnswer is not intended or designed for EMERGENCY questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals.
