Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hood v. Todd

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided May 17, 2010No. S10A0131Published

1DissentHines, Justice

I respectfully dissent because the opinion of the majority is premised upon an ill-supported finding of testamentary intent based upon the faulty and perilous legal conclusion that the term “lawful,” when used to describe blood descendants named in a will, necessarily precludes biological children born out of wedlock.

As the majority sets forth, in this case the would-be biological child of the testator, Regina Gordon Todd, is attempting to obtain a child’s portion of the estate of the late John E. Buffington. Buffing-ton’s legitimate daughters, Beth Buffington Hood and Ginger Buffington…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pylant v. BurnsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  2. Carey v. JaynesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2008
  3. Whitlock v. LawsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API