George Dodd v. Gary U. Dodd, as Administrator of the Estate of Titus Dodd
This text of George Dodd v. Gary U. Dodd, as Administrator of the Estate of Titus Dodd (George Dodd v. Gary U. Dodd, as Administrator of the Estate of Titus Dodd) 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.
Opinion
SECOND DIVISION MILLER, P. J., RICKMAN and REESE, JJ.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules
May 22, 2019
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A19A0178. DODD v. DODD.
RICKMAN, Judge.
George Dodd filed a complaint against Gary U. Dodd (“the administrator”), as
administrator of the estate of Titus Dodd, in the Superior Court of DeKalb County
seeking payment of funeral expenses from the estate. The superior court dismissed
the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, Dodd contends that the
superior court erred by dismissing his case. For the following reasons, we vacate the
judgment and remand the case to the superior court for proceedings consistent with
this opinion.
Our review of the dismissal of a case is de novo. See Benefield v. Martin, 276
Ga. App. 130 (622 SE2d 469) (2005). The record shows that following the death of
his brother (“the decedent”), Dodd paid $7,335.00 in funeral expenses. Approximately three years after the decedent’s death, Dodd filed a complaint in
superior court against the administrator of the estate claiming that the estate was
liable for the payment of the funeral expenses pursuant to OCGA § 53-7-40.
Almost nine years after the complaint was filed, a jury trial was held. During
the trial, the administrator testified that the estate case was still pending in Cobb
County. After the close of the evidence, the superior court questioned whether it had
jurisdiction because the case involved a claim against the estate. Following arguments
from both parties, the superior court held that it did not have jurisdiction of this case,
that it should have been filed in Cobb County and litigated before the probate court
judge; the court therefore dismissed the case.
Dodd contends that the superior court erred by dismissing the case for lack of
jurisdiction. Alternatively, Dodd argues that if jurisdiction properly lies with the
probate court, the case should not have been dismissed, it should have been
transferred to the probate court.
The probate courts have “original, exclusive, and general jurisdiction of . . .
[a]ll other matters and things as appertain or relate to estates of deceased persons.”
OCGA § 15-9-30 (a) (11). “With respect to areas in which the probate court has been
given exclusive, original subject matter jurisdiction, its authority is broad.” (Citation
2 and punctuation omitted.) Benefield, 276 Ga. App. at 130-131. OCGA § 53-7-40
governs the priority of the claims against an estate:
Unless otherwise provided by law, all property of the estate, both real and personal, shall be liable for the payment of claims against the estate in the following order: (1) Year’s support for the family; (2) Funeral expenses, whether or not the decedent leaves a surviving spouse, in an amount which corresponds with the circumstances of the decedent in life. If the estate is solvent, the personal representative is authorized to provide a suitable protection for the grave; (3) Other necessary expenses of administration; (4) Reasonable expenses of the decedent’s last illness; (5) Unpaid taxes or other debts due the state or the United States; (6) Judgments, secured interests, and other liens created during the lifetime of the decedent, to be paid according to their priority of lien. Secured interests and other liens on specific property shall be preferred only to the extent of such property; and (7) All other claims.
(Emphasis supplied).
Because this claim against the estate concerned the payment of funeral
expenses, it fell within the subject matter jurisdiction of the probate court. See
Cunningham v. Estate of Cunningham, 304 Ga. App. 608, 611-612 (2) (697 SE2d
280) (2010) (holding that the probate court had jurisdiction pursuant to OCGA § 53-
7-40 for reasonable expenses of the decedent’s last illness). “[A] superior court, as
a court of equity, can only exercise its concurrent jurisdiction over the administration
3 of estates when complete and adequate remedies at law are unavailable.” (Citation
and punctuation omitted.) Benfield, 276 Ga. App. at 131. Here, Dodd does not show
how his remedies at law are unavailable. Dodd claims that starting the case over in
the probate court would damage his interest, but he does not show why litigating the
case in probate court would not provide a complete and adequate remedy. See Id.
Accordingly, the superior court correctly determined that it lacked jurisdiction
to hear this case. See Cunningham, 304 Ga. App. at 612 (2). However, “[a]ny court
shall transfer to the appropriate court in the state any civil case in which it determines
that jurisdiction or venue lies elsewhere.” (Citation omitted.) Id. The superior court
erred by dismissing the case instead of transferring it to the probate court of Cobb
County. We vacate the superior court’s order and remand the case to the superior
court with the direction that the superior court transfer the case to the probate court
of Cobb County. See Id.
Judgment vacated; case remanded. Miller, P. J., and Reese, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
George Dodd v. Gary U. Dodd, as Administrator of the Estate of Titus Dodd, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-dodd-v-gary-u-dodd-as-administrator-of-the-estate-of-titus-dodd-gactapp-2019.