Slaick v. Arnold

307 Ga.App. 410 (2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The real property at issue, in this case, was previously owned by Cora Belle Dorsey, who died on September 4, 1989. Dorsey devised the property at issue to Day and D 'share and share alike.' D, as the executor of Dorsey's will, filed an assent to the devise on August 2, 1991. A fee-simple title vested in Day and D as provided in Dorsey's will.' On April 20, 1990, before D's devise from Dorsey's estate to Day and D, Day and D went to an attorney's office for the purpose of executing reciprocal deeds for the property at issue that reserved a life estate for each grantor. The deed from Day to D provides: For and in consideration of LOVE AND AFFECTION AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, has bargained, sold and does by these presents bargain, sell, remise, release, and forever quit-claim to D, her heirs and assigns, all the right, title, interest, claim or demand which Day has or may have had or may acquire in the future in and to the property at issue]....Day 'expressly reserves for herself a life estate in and to the aforesaid lands, it is the intent of the grantor to deed a remainder interest only.' The reciprocal deed from D to Day was never recorded and cannot be located. Day's will devised her half interest 'in any real property owned jointly by me and D' to her four other children. She then specifically identified the property at issue in this suit. Day died on March 27, 2006. The record shows that the administrator of Day's estate, Arnold (P), filed an action for declaratory judgment in probate court to determine if D received a valid deed from Day before her death. P asserted the deed might not be valid based upon an after-acquired title problem, as well as issues of invalid consideration and fraud in the inception. The superior court ruled in favor of Day's estate. The trial court declared the deed from Day to D 'void as it lacks valid and valuable consideration.' In Georgia, deeds which are given for 'Love and Affection and other Good and Valuable Consideration' but do not state a monetary amount given are voluntary, and on their face, lack valid consideration required to effectuate a binding transfer.' D appealed.