Requirement of Guardian to Answer Charges Affecting Obligations as Guardian; Revocation of Guardianship; Impact on Other Proceedings

1. Law
2. Georgia Code
3. Guardian and Ward
4. Guardians of Minors
5. Violations by Guardians
6. Requirement of Guardian to Answer Charges Affecting Obligations as Guardian; Revocation of Guardianship; Impact on Other Proceedings

1. Upon the petition of any interested person or whenever it appears to the court that good cause may exist to revoke or suspend the letters of guardianship or to impose sanctions, the court shall cite the guardian to answer the charge. The court shall investigate the allegations and may require such accounting as the court deems appropriate. The court may appoint a temporary substitute guardian for the minor during the investigation.
2. Upon investigation the court may in its discretion:
   1. Revoke or suspend the letters of guardianship;
   2. Require additional security;
   3. Reduce or deny compensation to the guardian or impose such other sanction or sanctions as the court deems appropriate; and
   4. Issue any other order as in the court's judgment is appropriate under the circumstances of the case.
3. The revocation or suspension of letters of guardianship shall not abate any action pending for or against the guardian. The successor guardian shall be made a party to the action in the manner provided in Code Section 9-11-25.

(Code 1981, §29-2-42, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 161, § 1; Ga. L. 2005, p. 60, § 29/HB 95.)

Law reviews.

- For article on the problems and benefits of multiple fiduciaries in estate planning, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 355 (1981). For survey article on wills, trusts, guardianships, and fiduciary administration, see 60 Mercer L. Rev. 417 (2008).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 53-6-144 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Letters of testamentary guardianship.

- Superior court erred in granting an aunt and uncle custody of minor children because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the petition for custody since a probate court had exclusive jurisdiction to issue and revoke letters of testamentary guardianship, and O.C.G.A. § 29-2-4(b) mandated the issuance of letters of testamentary guardianship to the brother of the children's father without notice and a hearing and without consideration of the children's best interests; equity afforded no valid basis for the superior court's exercise of jurisdiction because the aunt and uncle had an appropriate remedy in the probate court to challenge the testamentary guardianship: a petition for revocation or suspension of the brother's letters of testamentary guardianship. Zinkhan v. Bruce, 305 Ga. App. 510, 699 S.E.2d 833 (2010).

Commission on extra compensation authorized.

- An administrator was entitled to a commission on a sum disbursed to the administrator as extra compensation. Sams v. Leskanic, 220 Ga. App. 202, 469 S.E.2d 703 (1996) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 53-6-144).

Commission on prior commission not authorized.

- An administrator was not entitled to the payment of a commission on a previously paid commission. Sams v. Leskanic, 220 Ga. App. 202, 469 S.E.2d 703 (1996) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 53-6-144).

Download our app to see the most-to-date content.