Snook v. Sessoms, 43834
| Decision Date | 25 November 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 43834,43834 |
| Citation | 350 S.E.2d 237,256 Ga. 482 |
| Parties | SNOOK et al. v. SESSOMS et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
A.P. Guttshall, Guttshall, Cook & Guttshall, Thomasville, for James Snook et al.
John T. McTier, Tillman, McTier, Coleman, Talley & Newbern, Valdosta, for Alexander Sessoms et al.
John B. Miller, Miller, Simpson & Tatum, Savannah, Theodore Solomon, Jones & Solomon, Alma, Dorothy S. Porter, Enterprise, Ala., Berrien Sutton, Homerville, Ruth S. Hughes, Astor, Fla., for Mareese Sessoms.
Snook, Prevatt, and Hinson, who are income beneficiaries of the A.K. Sessoms trust, brought suit against the trustees. The trustees then filed a petition for declaratory relief in another county to determine whether these beneficiaries had violated the terms of the in terrorem clause of the trust, and thereby, had extinguished their rights as beneficiaries. The trial court declared their rights terminated. We granted to the beneficiaries an interlocutory appeal.
Section 28 of the trust provides:
The beneficiaries contend that their complaints are directed against the trustees, and did not constitute an attempt to change any terms of the trust. With this contention we agree. The executor of a will Cohen v. Reisman, 203 Ga. 684, 48 S.E.2d 113 (1948). This principle applies as well to trustees.
A beneficiary assuredly is empowered to enforce the provisions of a trust, no matter the terms of any in terrorem clause.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Slosberg v. Giller
...involving in terrorem clauses in wills when analyzing the effect of an in terrorem clause on a trust. See, e.g., Snook v. Sessoms , 256 Ga. 482, 482, 350 S.E.2d 237 (1986) ; Callaway v. Willard , 321 Ga. App. 349, 353, (739 S.E.2d 533) (2013). See also Johnston v. Goss , Case No. 95-6295, 1......
-
Durham v. Durham
...708 (2007); Ludwig v. Ludwig, 281 Ga. 724, 642 S.E.2d 638 (2007); Miller v. Walker, 270 Ga. 811, 514 S.E.2d 22 (1999); Snook v. Sessoms, 256 Ga. 482, 350 S.E.2d 237 (1986). However, only one of these cases was decided after Beauchamp and involved the straightforward interpretation of a trus......
-
Duncan v. Rawls, A17A2052
...trust] assuredly is empowered to enforce the provisions of a trust, no matter the terms of any in terrorem clause." Snook v. Sessoms , 256 Ga. 482, 482, 350 S.E.2d 237 (1986). Thus, in terrorem clauses are enforceable against challenges to a will itself, such as a caveat that seeks to "dest......
-
Duncan v. Rawls
...will contest triggering the in-terrorem clause in will, when caveator initiated proceedings to contest the will).17 Snook v. Sessoms , 256 Ga. 482, 482, 350 S.E.2d 237 (1986) ; (punctuation omitted); accord Duncan I , 345 Ga. App. at 351 (2) (a), 812 S.E.2d 647.18 In re Estate of Burkhalter......