Cain v. Cain

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cain v. Cain

337 S.E.2d 377, 176 Ga. App. 671, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2544

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 16, 1985

Docket70512

StatusPublished

This text of 337 S.E.2d 377 (Cain v. Cain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cain v. Cain, 337 S.E.2d 377, 176 Ga. App. 671, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2544 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Beasley, Judge.

Waymon Junior Cain died intestate on September 13, 1984, leav[672]*672ing his two minor children, a son and a daughter, as his sole heirs at law. Appellee Debra Jean Cain is the deceased’s former wife and the mother and natural guardian of their two children. She obtained temporary letters of administration to the estate and then petitioned the probate court for appointment as permanent administratrix. Appellants, the father and brother of the deceased, filed a caveat which alleged they were heirs of the deceased, contended appellee was not entitled to administer the estate, and sought appointment of another named individual as administrator of the estate. The probate court dismissed their caveat and granted permanent letters of administration to appellee. Caveators appeal from the superior court’s affirmance of the probate court’s action.

Decided October 16, 1985 Rehearing denied November 1, 1985 Sam S. Harben, Jr., for appellants. David C. Jones, Jr., for appellee.

The principles of law enunciated in Wansley v. Tull, 153 Ga. App. 92 (264 SE2d 567) (1980), control. It was incumbent upon the father and brother, as caveators, to show an interest in the estate as 1) heirs at law, 2) creditors, or 3) having such interest which may be enforced by suit against the administrator of the estate. The sole basis asserted was as heirs at law, but the children, not they, were such heirs. OCGA § 53-4-2 (4). Since the caveators had no standing to contest the issuance of permanent letters of administration, the probate court correctly dismissed the caveat. Although the superior court considered the merits of the appeal, it correctly affirmed the probate court’s dismissal. Where the judgment of the trial court is proper and legal for any reason, it will be affirmed regardless of the reason. Hairston Enterprises v. Lee, 162 Ga. App. 475, 476 (291 SE2d 404) (1982).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beasley, Judge.

Waymon Junior Cain died intestate on September 13, 1984, leav[672]*672ing his two minor children, a son and a daughter, as his sole heirs at law. Appellee Debra Jean Cain is the deceased’s former wife and the mother and natural guardian of their two children. She obtained temporary letters of administration to the estate and then petitioned the probate court for appointment as permanent administratrix. Appellants, the father and brother of the deceased, filed a caveat which alleged they were heirs of the deceased, contended appellee was not entitled to administer the estate, and sought appointment of another named individual as administrator of the estate. The probate court dismissed their caveat and granted permanent letters of administration to appellee. Caveators appeal from the superior court’s affirmance of the probate court’s action.

Decided October 16, 1985 Rehearing denied November 1, 1985 Sam S. Harben, Jr., for appellants. David C. Jones, Jr., for appellee.

The principles of law enunciated in Wansley v. Tull, 153 Ga. App. 92 (264 SE2d 567) (1980), control. It was incumbent upon the father and brother, as caveators, to show an interest in the estate as 1) heirs at law, 2) creditors, or 3) having such interest which may be enforced by suit against the administrator of the estate. The sole basis asserted was as heirs at law, but the children, not they, were such heirs. OCGA § 53-4-2 (4). Since the caveators had no standing to contest the issuance of permanent letters of administration, the probate court correctly dismissed the caveat. Although the superior court considered the merits of the appeal, it correctly affirmed the probate court’s dismissal. Where the judgment of the trial court is proper and legal for any reason, it will be affirmed regardless of the reason. Hairston Enterprises v. Lee, 162 Ga. App. 475, 476 (291 SE2d 404) (1982).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

337 S.E.2d 377, 176 Ga. App. 671, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cain-v-cain-gactapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack