Piccione v. Arp

302 Ga. 270 (2017) · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 16, 2017

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Gregory and Adam Piccione’s motion for summary judgment in a dispute over whether their deceased mother’s testamentary share passed to them under Georgia’s anti-lapse statute. The court held that the will’s use of the capitalized term “PER CAPITA” created a limitation requiring the named beneficiaries to survive the testator, so the anti-lapse statute did not apply to the gift to Donna Piccione. Because the Picciones therefore had no property interest in the estate, the trial court properly denied summary judgment.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Hines, Chief Justice
Jurisdiction
Georgia
Decision date
October 16, 2017
Procedural posture
The grandchildren of the testator appealed an interlocutory order denying their motion for summary judgment in an action against the executors and another heir concerning their claimed interests in the estate.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviewed the superior court's denial of summary judgment and the interpretation of the will and applicable statutes de novo.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the Supreme Court of Georgia
Parties
Gregory Piccione, Adam Piccione v. Sam Arp, Dwayne Arp, David Arp
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

probatestatutory interpretationplain meaning ruleprobate procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

probate and estate lawwills and trustsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Virginia Arp's bequests to her four named children were individual gifts or a class gift.
  2. Whether the phrase "PER CAPITA" in the will constituted a limitation requiring each named beneficiary to survive the testator.
  3. Whether Georgia's anti-lapse statute, OCGA § 53-4-64 (a), preserved Donna Piccione's testamentary gift for her descendants.

Holdings

  1. The bequests to Virginia's four named children were individual gifts, not a gift to a class.
  2. In the circumstances of this will, the phrase "PER CAPITA" imposed a limitation requiring the named children to survive Virginia in order to take their bequests.
  3. OCGA § 53-4-64 (a) did not apply because Donna's testamentary gift was subject to a limitation requiring her to survive Virginia; Donna's gift therefore lapsed and did not vest in the Picciones.

Key quotations

The choice of “PER CAPITA” in this circumstance imposes a requirement that the individuals named take the bequests in their own stead, that those bequests not pass through representation, and accordingly, that the named individuals must survive Virginia. (302 Ga. at 276)

Factual background

Virginia Arp executed a will in 2002 leaving all of her property to her four named children, including Donna Piccione, "PER CAPITA." Donna died in 2006, before Virginia died in 2013. The executors distributed the estate among Virginia's three surviving children, and Donna's children claimed that they were entitled to Donna's one-fourth share under Georgia's anti-lapse statute.

Procedural history

Virginia Arp's will was probated without objection in the Probate Court of Polk County. After the executors distributed the estate among Virginia's three surviving children, Gregory and Adam Piccione sued in superior court for conversion, fraud, and trespass, claiming that they inherited their deceased mother's share under Georgia's anti-lapse statute. The superior court denied their motion for summary judgment, issued a certificate of immediate review, and the Supreme Court of Georgia granted their application for interlocutory appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…