Smith v. Lockridge, 288 Ga. 180

Grantor D.B. Smith executed 11 deeds (1975–1980) naming Virginia Smith or Terri Sanders; deeds kept in grantor's possession and not recorded initially.
In 1997–1998, grantor recorded the deeds but altered grantees to Danny Lockridge and his family; affiant explained he changed only undelivered deeds while in power.
Virginia Smith executed a power of attorney in 1976; grantor was guardianship for Terri Sanders from 1981–1988; deeds later conveyed to grandchildren and others.
On February 23, 2005, grantor executed a quitclaim deed conveying 3,000+ acres to Danny Lockridge and his wife and daughter; grantor died in 2006.
Plaintiffs challenged validity of the 1975–1980 deeds and 2005 deed; trial court granted summary judgment for validity of the 2005 deed and for the 2005 quitclaim, but denied some aspects of the 1975–1980 deeds; Court of Appeals remanded on some issues and affirmed others; Georgia Supreme Court affirmed overall judgment, resolving issues on delivery, fiduciary delivery, and res judicata.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether 1975–1980 deeds were delivered to the original grantees as a matter of law.	Smith/others contend grantor, as fiduciary, delivered by fiduciary relation.	Lockridge(s) argue no delivery where deeds remained in grantor's possession and control.	Delivery did not occur; deeds were not delivered despite fiduciary relations.
Whether the 2005 quitclaim deed is barred by res judicata from prior appeal.	Plaintiffs argue counts post-appeal could be new theory.	Grandsons contend prior appellate decision precludes new theories.	Res judicata bars cloud on title, undue influence, and mistake-of-fact counts.
Whether res judicata bars the undue influence and mistake-of-fact claims under the 2005 deed.	New counts arise from same facts in original complaint.	Claims are barred as matters already adjudicated or could have been raised.	Res judicata bars undue influence and mistake-of-fact counts.
Whether the amendment to challenge the 2005 deed introduced new issues not raised earlier.	Amendments clarify legal basis for challenge to 2005 deed.	Amendments attempt to relitigate issues; not allowed.	Amendments not permitted to revive former judgment claims.
Whether other enumerations of error have merit given res judicata findings.	Other errors argued; some factual misdates.	No merit given res judicata and summary judgment rulings.	Other errors deemed insubstantial; no reversal required.

Robinson v. Williams, 280 Ga. 877 (Ga. 2006) (delivery requires pass beyond grantor's control)
Morris v. Johnson, 219 Ga. 81 (Ga. 1963) (delivery requires loss of control and intent to deliver)
Stinson v. Woodland Bank, 154 Ga. 254 (Ga. 1922) (trust relationships do not by themselves create delivery)
Keesee v. Collum, 208 Ga. 382 (Ga. 1951) (handing to potential grantee and recall does not constitute delivery)
Giuffrida v. Knight, 210 Ga. 128 (Ga. 1953) (deeds retained by grantor do not deliver title)