Wallace v. Moore

Supreme Court of Georgia

Wallace v. Moore

132 S.E.2d 37, 219 Ga. 137, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 381

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 18, 1963

Docket22070

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 132 S.E.2d 37 (Wallace v. Moore) 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

Wallace v. Moore, 132 S.E.2d 37, 219 Ga. 137, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 381 (Ga. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Justice.

The plaintiff in error’s sole contention is that there was insufficient evidence to show that the deceased made a gift, within the contemplation of the law, of the certificates to the two minor children.

The requisites of a valid gift are set out in Code § 48-101: “To constitute a valid gift, there shall be the intention to give by the donor, acceptance by the donee, and delivery of the article given or some act accepted by the law in lieu thereof.” Further, Code § 48-102 provides that “A parent, guardian, or friend may accept for an infant.”

There was evidence to the effect that the deceased made an unconditional gift to the children. All .the legal requirements were met: an intention to give; a renunciation of the right of ownership by the giver, without the power of revocation; delivery of the possession by the giver to the recipient: acceptance by the donees or by the parent for them. Mims v. Ross, 42 Ga. 121; Burt v. Andrews, 112 Ga. 465 (37 SE 726); Bowen v. Hol *140 land, 182 Ga. 430 (2) (185 SE 720). That after the certificates were delivered to Mrs. Moore and accepted by her as a gift to the children she placed them, at a later time, in the possession of the donor, Mr. Griffin, for safe keeping did not affect the validity of the gift.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Quillian, Justice.

The plaintiff in error’s sole contention is that there was insufficient evidence to show that the deceased made a gift, within the contemplation of the law, of the certificates to the two minor children.

The requisites of a valid gift are set out in Code § 48-101: “To constitute a valid gift, there shall be the intention to give by the donor, acceptance by the donee, and delivery of the article given or some act accepted by the law in lieu thereof.” Further, Code § 48-102 provides that “A parent, guardian, or friend may accept for an infant.”

There was evidence to the effect that the deceased made an unconditional gift to the children. All .the legal requirements were met: an intention to give; a renunciation of the right of ownership by the giver, without the power of revocation; delivery of the possession by the giver to the recipient: acceptance by the donees or by the parent for them. Mims v. Ross, 42 Ga. 121; Burt v. Andrews, 112 Ga. 465 (37 SE 726); Bowen v. Hol *140 land, 182 Ga. 430 (2) (185 SE 720). That after the certificates were delivered to Mrs. Moore and accepted by her as a gift to the children she placed them, at a later time, in the possession of the donor, Mr. Griffin, for safe keeping did not affect the validity of the gift.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E.2d 37, 219 Ga. 137, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-moore-ga-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack