Legal Opinion

Hobbs v. Winfield

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided September 13, 2017No. S17A0720PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BENHAM, Justice.

This case involves the revocation of a will due to after-born children of the testator. The probate court determined the will did not contemplate the birth of future children, and therefore their birth revoked the will. The named beneficiary appeals.

The record shows that the testator, Alphonzo Raul Hobbs, executed a will in 1989 when he was a 20-year-old serving in the military. The *24will named Hobbs’s mother as sole beneficiary and personal representative of the estate, and, in the event his mother did not survive him, he named his “grandmother,” appellant Evelyn Hobbs, as the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sutton v. HancockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Williams v. LaneSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  3. Melican v. ParkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 2008
  4. Timberlake v. MunfordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1997
  5. Evans v. PalmourSupreme Court of Georgia · 2001

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Munn v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2022
  2. HOBBS v. WINFIELD, ADMINISTRATRIXSupreme Court of Georgia · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API