Charles Alexander Peterson v. Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 15, 2017
DocketA17A1176
StatusPublished

This text of Charles Alexander Peterson v. Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson (Charles Alexander Peterson v. Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson) 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
Charles Alexander Peterson v. Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson, (Ga. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 27, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1176. CHARLES ALEXANDER PETERSON v. MARY JEANETTE WILLCOXON PETERSON et al.

Following his father’s death, Charles Alexander Peterson, the beneficiary of a trust created by his father’s will, filed in probate court a Petition for Accounting and Damages for Breach of Duties as Executor and Trustee and a Petition for Removal of Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson and Cleveland Calhoun Peterson. The probate court entered an order in favor of the plaintiff and the defendant appealed to the superior court.1 The superior court granted summary judgment to the defendant, and the plaintiff filed this notice of appeal on December 13, 2016. For cases in which the notice of appeal was filed prior to January 1, 2017, our State Constitution granted the Georgia Supreme Court jurisdiction over appeals in “[a]ll cases involving wills.”2 Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (3). “The Georgia Supreme Court has interpreted this language to mean only those cases where the validity or construction of a will is the main issue on appeal.” In re Estate of Farkas, 325 Ga. App. 477, 478 (1) (753 SE2d 137) (2013). Because the resolution of this case may require an evaluation of the meaning of the decedent’s will, it appears

1 Generally, appeals from decisions of the superior courts reviewing decisions of lower courts must come by discretionary application. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1). However, “this provision shall not apply to decisions of . . . probate courts[.]” Id. 2 Pursuant to the Appellate Jurisdiction Reform Act of 2016, the Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction over “[a]ll cases involving wills” in which the notice of appeal was filed on or after January 1, 2017. OCGA § 15-3-3.1 (a) (3); see Ga. L. 2016, p. 883, § 6-1 (c) (effective date). that jurisdiction may lie in the Supreme Court. As the Supreme Court has the ultimate responsibility for determining appellate jurisdiction, see Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med. Clinic, 267 Ga. 177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996), this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/27/2017 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

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

Related

Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Medical Clinic, Inc.
476 S.E.2d 587 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1996)
In re Farkas
753 S.E.2d 137 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Charles Alexander Peterson v. Mary Jeanette Willcoxon Peterson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-alexander-peterson-v-mary-jeanette-willcoxon-peterson-gactapp-2017.