In re Olliff

Supreme Court of Georgia

In re Olliff

366 S.E.2d 289, 258 Ga. 157, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 93

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 7, 1988

Docket45257

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 366 S.E.2d 289 (In re Olliff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Olliff, 366 S.E.2d 289, 258 Ga. 157, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 93 (Ga. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Hunt, Justice.

We granted certiorari in In re Olliff, 184 Ga. App. 846 (363 SE2d 158) (1987), to determine whether Ms. Olliff was precluded as a matter of law from recovering her expenses and attorney fees incurred in her successful defense against a guardianship petition. Having heard [158]*158the arguments and considered the record and briefs in this case, we agree with the Court of Appeals’ opinion holding that “expenses” as used in OCGA § 29-5-13 (a) refers to “costs” incurred in a judicial proceeding brought under OCGA Ch. 29-5, rather than, as Ms. Olliff claimed, the expenses of litigation. Further, the statute is not subject to any of the infirmities claimed by Ms. Olliff. Accordingly, we affirm the Court of Appeals’ opinion which, in turn, affirmed the trial court’s denial of Ms. Olliff’s application for expenses and attorney fees.

Decided April 7, 1988. Franklin & Taulbee, James B. Franklin, Allen, Brown & Eden-field, Gerald M. Edenfield, Michael J. Classens, for appellant. Oliver, Maner & Gray, I. Gregory Hodges, Wendy Woods Williamson, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hunt, Justice.

We granted certiorari in In re Olliff, 184 Ga. App. 846 (363 SE2d 158) (1987), to determine whether Ms. Olliff was precluded as a matter of law from recovering her expenses and attorney fees incurred in her successful defense against a guardianship petition. Having heard [158]*158the arguments and considered the record and briefs in this case, we agree with the Court of Appeals’ opinion holding that “expenses” as used in OCGA § 29-5-13 (a) refers to “costs” incurred in a judicial proceeding brought under OCGA Ch. 29-5, rather than, as Ms. Olliff claimed, the expenses of litigation. Further, the statute is not subject to any of the infirmities claimed by Ms. Olliff. Accordingly, we affirm the Court of Appeals’ opinion which, in turn, affirmed the trial court’s denial of Ms. Olliff’s application for expenses and attorney fees.

Decided April 7, 1988. Franklin & Taulbee, James B. Franklin, Allen, Brown & Eden-field, Gerald M. Edenfield, Michael J. Classens, for appellant. Oliver, Maner & Gray, I. Gregory Hodges, Wendy Woods Williamson, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

366 S.E.2d 289, 258 Ga. 157, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-olliff-ga-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack