Estate of Lott, In re

Citation251 Ga. 461,306 S.E.2d 920
Decision Date21 September 1983
Docket NumberNo. 39983,39983
PartiesIn re ESTATE OF Gwendolyn H. LOTT.
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

Douglas W. Mitchell III, T.V. Williams, Jr., Douglas, for appellants.

James D. Hudson, M.L. Preston, Preston, Preston & Hudson, Douglas, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This case presents a question of whether the Constitution of Georgia of 1983 broadens the jurisdiction of this court relating to cases involving wills. We hold that it does not, and the case is therefore transferred to the Court of Appeals.

This is an appeal of a superior court order which ruled that the probate court correctly determined it did not have jurisdiction to set aside the probate of a will because of a lost codicil being found. The Constitution of Georgia of 1976, Art. VI, Sec. II, Para. IV (Code Ann. § 2-3104), confers upon this court jurisdiction over "all cases which involve the validity of, or the construction of wills." We have long construed this constitutional provision as conferring jurisdiction only in cases in which the validity or construction of the will is the main issue on appeal. Darnell v. Tate, 208 Ga. 23, 64 S.E.2d 582 (1951); Trust Co. of Georgia v. Smith, 182 Ga. 360, 185 S.E. 525 (1936); Reece v. McCrary, 179 Ga. 812, 177 S.E. 741 (1934). The Constitution of Georgia of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. III, confers jurisdiction to this court in "all cases involving wills."

We hold that the language "all cases involving wills" means those cases in which the will's validity or meaning is in question. The only issue in this case is the jurisdiction of the probate court in an action to set aside a probate based on discovery of new evidence. Jurisdiction therefore lies in the Court of Appeals.

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All Justices concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Lamar County v. ET Carlyle Co., S03A1740.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • March 22, 2004
    ...title to land or wills are merely ancillary to the underlying issues to be decided on appeal. See, e.g., In re Estate of Gwendolyn H. Lott, 251 Ga. 461, 306 S.E.2d 920 (1983) ("cases involving wills"); Mobley v. Sewell, 226 Ga.App. 866, n. 1, 487 S.E.2d 398 (1997) (226 Ga.App. 866,487 S.E.2......
  • Boyd v. Johngalt Holdings, LLC, S11A1689.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • March 5, 2012
    ...III (3)) has been construed to embrace only “those cases in which the will's validity or meaning is in question.” In re Estate of Lott, 251 Ga. 461, 306 S.E.2d 920 (1983). Jurisdiction of “[a]ll habeas corpus cases” (Art. VI, Sec.VI, Par. III (4)) has been construed to cover only those case......
  • Fowler v. Cox, No. A03A2530
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • December 19, 2003
    ...cross-appeal involved the validity or meaning of the will, the Supreme Court transferred both appeals to this Court. In re Estate of Lott, 251 Ga. 461, 306 S.E.2d 920 (1983); Darnell v. Tate, 208 Ga. 23, 64 S.E.2d 582 In Case No. A03A2530, Fowler appeals from the complained-of order, arguin......
  • West v. State
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • September 21, 1983
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT