The anti-lapse statute does not apply in a case where all beneficiaries predeceased the testatrix because the vesting of the bequests was conditioned on the beneficiaries surviving the testatrix. Bridges v. Taylor (Ga., No. S03A0095, April 29, 2003).
Agnes O. Young's will contained five specific bequests and left the residue of her estate to three beneficiaries in fixed percentages. The will provided that "[i]f any of the ... beneficiaries shall predecease me, then in such event the share of such beneficiary predeceasing me shall lapse and shall augment proportionally the remaining shares." When Ms. Young died in 2000, all of the persons named as beneficiaries had predeceased her. The administrator of the estate moved for summary judgment, contending that the residue of the estate should be distributed according to the law of intestacy. Descendants of the last beneficiary to die countered that the anti-lapse statute should apply, and since their ancestor outlived the other beneficiaries, they should receive the entire residue of the estate.
The trial court held that the law of intestacy rather than the anti-lapse statute applied because the residuary bequests were not without limitation and were not absolute gifts.
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirms, ruling that the vesting of the bequests was conditioned on the beneficiaries surviving the testatrix. The court rules that the anti-lapse statute cannot be applied because of the unfulfilled condition attached to vesting.
For the full text of this decision, go to: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1482265.html
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of nearly 2,000 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
