Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jenifer Duncan v. Olga Rawls

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 16, 2018No. A17A2052Published

1DissentBethel, Judge

Because the rule announced by the majority today is not required by statute, deprives the court of one of its basic functions, promotes and facilitates fraud, and produces a genuinely absurd result, I must respectfully dissent.

The majority misreads OCGA § 53-12-22 (b), which provides that an in terrorem provision is "void unless there is a direction in the trust instrument as to the disposition of the property if the condition in terrorem is violated," to mean that an in terrorem clause is always valid and enforceable , regardless of surrounding circumstances, if it simply contains a…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Thompson v. TalmadgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
  2. Haugen v. Henry CountySupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
  3. South Norwalk Trust Co. v. St. JohnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
  4. Friend's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  5. Tate v. CampTennessee Supreme Court · 1922

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API