Rankowitz v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia

Rankowitz v. Smith

471 S.E.2d 853, 266 Ga. 805, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2260, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 365

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 24, 1996

DocketS96A1034

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 471 S.E.2d 853 (Rankowitz v. Smith) 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

Rankowitz v. Smith, 471 S.E.2d 853, 266 Ga. 805, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2260, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 365 (Ga. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Hunstein, Justice.

Jeff Smith, a widower with numerous children, executed a will leaving his farm (which constituted the bulk of his estate) to one child, Clarence Smith, whom he also named as his executor. Jeff Smith died on November 24,1993 and his will was offered for probate by Clarence Smith. A caveat was filed by Margaret Rankowitz, a sister of Clarence Smith, along with other heirs of Jeff Smith (hereinafter “appellants”). Appellants contended that the testator had been unduly influenced by Clarence Smith to leave the bulk of the estate to him and that Jeff Smith’s signature on the will was a forgery. The will was probated and appellants appealed to the Superior Court of Montgomery County. Following a jury trial, the superior court entered a final judgment on May 10,1995, admitting the will to probate. Appellants’ motion for new trial was dismissed on September 25,1995 due to inexcusable delay in ordering the preparation of the trial transcript.

In this appeal from that dismissal order appellants enumerate several alleged errors; however, the enumerated errors do not pertain to the ruling on the motion. Accordingly, the order dismissing appellants’ motion for new trial is affirmed, and it follows that we are without jurisdiction to address the express enumerations. Robinson v. Mullins, 172 Ga. App. 802 (325 SE2d 172) (1984).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hunstein, Justice.

Jeff Smith, a widower with numerous children, executed a will leaving his farm (which constituted the bulk of his estate) to one child, Clarence Smith, whom he also named as his executor. Jeff Smith died on November 24,1993 and his will was offered for probate by Clarence Smith. A caveat was filed by Margaret Rankowitz, a sister of Clarence Smith, along with other heirs of Jeff Smith (hereinafter “appellants”). Appellants contended that the testator had been unduly influenced by Clarence Smith to leave the bulk of the estate to him and that Jeff Smith’s signature on the will was a forgery. The will was probated and appellants appealed to the Superior Court of Montgomery County. Following a jury trial, the superior court entered a final judgment on May 10,1995, admitting the will to probate. Appellants’ motion for new trial was dismissed on September 25,1995 due to inexcusable delay in ordering the preparation of the trial transcript.

In this appeal from that dismissal order appellants enumerate several alleged errors; however, the enumerated errors do not pertain to the ruling on the motion. Accordingly, the order dismissing appellants’ motion for new trial is affirmed, and it follows that we are without jurisdiction to address the express enumerations. Robinson v. Mullins, 172 Ga. App. 802 (325 SE2d 172) (1984).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

471 S.E.2d 853, 266 Ga. 805, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2260, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rankowitz-v-smith-ga-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack