Slaick v. Arnold

Court of Appeals of Georgia
307 Ga. App. 410, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3723, 705 S.E.2d 206 (2010)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A voluntary deed cannot be canceled for lack of consideration absent equitable grounds such as fraud, and a failure to pay promised consideration constitutes a breach of contract rather than invalidating the conveyance.

Facts:

Cora Belle Dorsey died leaving real property to Katie Day and Nancy Slaick to share equally.
Day and Slaick visited an attorney to execute reciprocal deeds ensuring the property would pass to the survivor of the two.
Day executed a deed transferring her interest to Slaick while reserving a life estate for herself.
The deed stated the consideration was 'love and affection and other good and valuable consideration.'
Slaick allegedly executed a reciprocal deed to Day, but it was never recorded and could not be located.
Day subsequently died, and her will attempted to devise her interest in the property to her other children.

Procedural Posture:

Arnold (Administrator) filed an action for declaratory judgment against Slaick in the probate court.
The case was transferred to the superior court by consent of the parties.
The superior court held a bench trial and ruled in favor of the estate, declaring the deed void.
Slaick appealed the decision to the Georgia Supreme Court.
The Georgia Supreme Court transferred the appeal to the Court of Appeals, ruling that the case did not fall under its jurisdiction regarding title to land.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Is a deed transferring an interest in real property void for lack of consideration when it recites 'love and affection' as value or when the grantee fails to deliver the promised reciprocal consideration?

Opinions:

Majority - Smith

No, the deed is not void. The court reasoned that in Georgia, a voluntary deed (one given without financial payment) is valid between the parties and cannot be set aside merely for lack of consideration unless there is evidence of fraud. The court clarified that 'love and affection' is sufficient consideration for a deed. Furthermore, regarding the argument that Slaick failed to provide the reciprocal deed (the 'price' for the land), the court held that failure to pay promised consideration is a breach of contract that may justify damages, but it does not render the conveyance itself invalid or void the title.

Analysis:

This decision reinforces the finality of property transfers in Georgia, distinguishing sharply between property law and contract law. By holding that a failure to pay consideration does not void a deed, the court protects the stability of land titles against claims that a buyer failed to fulfill a promise. It establishes that once a deed is executed and delivered, the remedy for unpaid consideration is a suit for damages, not the return of the property. This prevents title disputes from arising years later based on alleged non-payment or failure to perform reciprocal agreements.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Slaick v. Arnold (2010)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"