Smith v. Hallum
Georgia Supreme Court
286 Ga. 834, 691 S.E.2d 848 (2010)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Alden Smith (defendant) allegedly shot and stabbed his grandmother Inez repeatedly to obtain half the proceeds of a life-insurance trust, but Inez survived. Alden’s grandfather John Smith, Inez’s husband, created the trust in 1990, when Alden was seven years old, to provide for his descendants. The sole trust asset was a $800,000 life-insurance policy on the joint lives of John and Inez. John and Inez had a child, who had Alden and a daughter, but that child died before John did in 2003. In 2004 Alden was charged with attacking Inez but claimed incompetency to stand trial. Trustee Judith Hallum (plaintiff) petitioned to amend the trust to prevent Alden from receiving anything. Specifically, Hallum sought to remove Alden as a beneficiary as if he had predeceased Inez, meaning the trust would still provide for any children Alden had before Inez died. Alden’s attorney filed a motion to appoint a guardian ad litem for Alden, claiming he suffered from paranoid delusions and a psychotic disorder that made him incapable of effectively assisting counsel. Hallum did not object. Meanwhile, the court continued the matter several times pending resolution of the criminal case. In 2007 the criminal court found Alden presently incompetent to stand trial and ordered a competency evaluation, but the court had not made any evidentiary determination whether Alden attacked Inez to speed his receipt of trust proceeds. The court granted Hallum’s request to modify the trust. Alden appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Huntstein, C.J.)
Dissent (Carley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.