Harris v. Peterson
318 Ga. App. 382
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Williams granted Anita Peterson a financial power of attorney in 2005 authorizing real estate transactions.
- In 2007 Williams contracted to sell his interest in inherited property to Harris; Anita then sought to transfer Williams’s interest to her husband via quitclaim deed.
- Williams refused to sign the quitclaim; Anita filed the power of attorney and the quitclaim deed bearing her signature on the same day.
- William’s sister-in-law and husband ownership transfers later led to a dispute over whether Anita acted within her authority and for Williams’s benefit.
- Trial court granted summary judgment to Anita; appellate court reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact remain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the POA authorized the transfer | Anita exceeded or violated Williams's instructions | POA authorized her to make real estate transfers | Genuine issues of material fact exist |
| Whether Anita profited to Williams's detriment | Agent cannot profit at principal's expense | Agent acted within the scope of authority | Jury questions remain |
| Whether Williams objected to Anita's actions | There was objection by Williams to the transfers | Objection, if any, not determinative | Question of fact exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Thornton v. Carpenter, 222 Ga. App. 809 (Ga. App. 1996) (POA does not negate principal's right to act in own name)
- Bradshaw v. McNeill, 228 Ga. App. 653 (Ga. App. 1997) (agents cannot profit at principal's detriment)
- Johnson v. First Nat. Bank of Rome, 253 Ga. 233 (Ga. 1984) (agents may not benefit from agency at principal's expense)
- LeCraw v. LeCraw, 261 Ga. 98 (Ga. 1991) (distinguishes uncontested objection scenarios)
- Knight v. Roberts, 316 Ga. App. 599 (Ga. App. 2012) (de novo review governs summary judgment standard)