Durham v. Durham
291 Ga. 231
| Ga. | 2012Background
- Donor Marjorie Durham created an inter vivos trust in 2000 naming herself as a beneficiary and four children as residuary beneficiaries.
- Ms. Durham died in 2009; in 2010 trustee Callaway sought a declaratory judgment about the in terrorem clause and proposed distribution to Lawrence Durham.
- Lawrence contended he is the sole residuary beneficiary because others violated the clause; Lucinda Durham Willard claimed she remained a beneficiary.
- Trial court granted Lucinda’s summary judgment on July 6, 2011; it denied Lawrence’s cross-motion on July 12, 2011.
- Case No. S12A0537: Lawrence appealed denial of summary judgment, transferred to this Court for jurisdiction assessment as an “equity case.”
- Case No. S12A0607: Callaway appealed the grant of Lucinda’s summary judgment; transferred to this Court and then routed for disposition consistent with equity-jurisdiction rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether interpreting the in terrorem clause falls within equity jurisdiction. | Lawrence: resolution affects trust administration, thus equity. | Majority: issue is a legal interpretation of a trust provision, not an equitable remedy. | Not an equity case; jurisdiction lies in Court of Appeals. |
| Whether trust administration matters alone invoke equity jurisdiction on appeal. | Trust administration impacts distribution, thus equity. | Jurisdiction depends on the appeal issue, not on form of relief. | No; insufficient to classify as equity case. |
| Whether Beauchamp/Warren control dictates equity jurisdiction for express trusts. | Trust administration and internal affairs warrant equity jurisdiction. | Jurisdiction follows the issue on appeal; not automatically equity. | Beauchamp/Warren control; primary appeal issue must concern equitable relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beauchamp v. Knight, 261 Ga. 608 (1991) (equity jurisdiction hinges on the issue, not case styling; relief's propriety governs)
- Warren v. Board of Regents of the Univ. System of Ga., 272 Ga. 142 (2000) (administration of trusts not always equity on appeal; issue controls jurisdiction)
- Reeves v. Newman, 287 Ga. 317 (2010) (implied trust case; appeal raised only legal questions; not equity on appeal)
- Redfearn v. Huntcliff Homes Assn., 271 Ga. 745 (1999) (equity vs. legal issues in appeals; contextual guidance on jurisdiction)
- Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Medical Clinic, 267 Ga. 177 (1996) (discussion of equity jurisdiction boundaries)
- Pittman v. Harbin Clinic Professional Assn., 263 Ga. 66 (1993) (equity appellate limits clarifications)
- Miller v. Walker, 270 Ga. 811 (1999) (trusts, adoption, and equitable relief; jurisdictional notes)
- Snook v. Sessoms, 256 Ga. 482 (1986) (trust provisions and in terrorem clause interplay with equity)