A gift in writing, without good consideration and without delivery, is void. However, when, in order for a gift to be valid, a written conveyance for good consideration is required by law, or when in any case a written conveyance is made for a good consideration, the execution and delivery of such conveyance shall dispense with the necessity of delivering the article given.
(Orig. Code 1863, § 2616; Code 1868, § 2617; Code 1873, § 2659; Code 1882, § 2659; Civil Code 1895, § 3566; Civil Code 1910, § 4146; Code 1933, § 48-104.)
Code Commission notes.- Pursuant to § 28-9-5, in 1991, "dispense" was substituted for "disperse" near the end of the second sentence.
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Actual delivery required.
- No effect can be given to deed of gift in writing where the maker retains the deed in the maker's own custody, in the absence of satisfactory proof that it was the maker's intention that such instrument should operate to immediately convey to the infant grantee the legal title to the premises therein described. Jenkins v. Southern Ry., 109 Ga. 35, 34 S.E. 355 (1899).
Gift of personalty by parol must be accompanied by delivery and acceptance of the article given, and while a gift evidenced by an ordinary writing (as distinguished from a specialty) dispenses with the necessity for a delivery of the article, such a writing does not ordinarily, in the absence of actual or constructive delivery, dispense with the necessity for a "good consideration." Trustees of Jesse Parker Williams Hosp. v. Nisbet, 189 Ga. 807, 7 S.E.2d 737 (1940).
If a gift in writing be not based upon a good consideration, it is a nudum pactum, and, in the absence of actual delivery of the property itself, remains ineffective. Cannon v. Williams, 194 Ga. 808, 22 S.E.2d 838 (1942).
Deed from mother to daughter based on good consideration.
- Deed of gift from a mother to her daughter would be based upon a good consideration, and the deed would be good whether there was any money consideration or not. Dunn v. Evans, 139 Ga. 741, 78 S.E. 122 (1913).
Presumption of gift by a father to a child is not confined to a gift in writing. Johnson v. Griffin, 80 Ga. 551, 7 S.E. 94 (1888).
Cited in Owen v. Smith, 91 Ga. 564, 18 S.E. 527 (1893); King v. McDuffie, 144 Ga. 318, 87 S.E. 22 (1915); Marchant v. Young, 147 Ga. 37, 92 S.E. 863 (1917); Brown v. Nichols, 23 Ga. App. 569, 99 S.E. 57 (1919); Cook v. Flanders, 164 Ga. 279, 138 S.E. 212 (1927); Jones v. Robinson, 172 Ga. 746, 158 S.E. 752 (1931); Waters v. Waters, 195 Ga. 281, 24 S.E.2d 20 (1943).