## Facts

- Russell and Sally Scarbrough bought a 16.59-acre tract from Dillie McIntyre by warranty deed (1988), subject to McIntyre’s reserved life estate in 1.2 acres containing a mobile home and other improvements.
- The reservation stated the life estate lasted for McIntyre’s natural life and “during her occupancy of this tract as a personal residence,” and made her responsible for maintenance, upkeep, and ad valorem taxes for the reserved tract.
- The Scarbroughs sought to establish title and terminate the life estate (1994), asserting (1) McIntyre no longer occupied the tract as a personal residence and (2) she committed waste by failing to maintain the property and pay taxes.
- On summary-judgment evidence, the Scarbroughs asserted McIntyre had not been seen on the property since 1990; the mobile home lacked utilities and a mailbox and was dilapidated; and a fire marshal described it as vacant, decayed, hazardous, and unfit for habitation.
- The Scarbroughs showed ad valorem taxes on the reserved tract had accrued since 1990 and were paid by Sally Scarbrough to protect the remainder interest.
- McIntyre (about 90 years old) averred she had health problems preventing recent occupancy and that she was renovating to make the home habitable; service records indicated she resided in a convalescent home outside the court’s jurisdiction in mid-1994.
- The trial court initially denied summary judgment, then granted it on reconsideration, ruling McIntyre’s failures constituted waste and resulted in forfeiture of the life estate and immediate possession for the remaindermen.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence conclusively showed McIntyre ceased “occupancy” as a personal residence under the deed’s condition on her life estate.
2. Whether undisputed nonpayment of ad valorem taxes and severe disrepair constituted waste—i.e., a failure to exercise ordinary care for preservation of the property—justifying termination (forfeiture) of the life estate.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed summary judgment for the Scarbroughs.
- The court held that “occupancy” did not necessarily require continuous physical presence and that the record left a factual question on occupancy given McIntyre’s asserted intent to return.
- The court nevertheless affirmed on the independent ground of waste, concluding the evidence conclusively established McIntyre failed to exercise ordinary care to preserve the property.
- The court upheld forfeiture of the life estate and ruled the remaindermen were entitled to immediate possession.

## Legal Principles

- A life tenant must exercise ordinary care for the preservation of the property to protect the remaindermen’s interest.
- Ordinary-care preservation obligations include maintaining improvements in reasonable condition and paying ad valorem property taxes to prevent risk or loss to the remainder interest.
- “Occupancy” conditions in a deed may permit temporary absence when accompanied by possession and intent to return; lack of continuous physical presence may not, by itself, end the life estate as a matter of law.
- Persistent neglect that threatens the estate—such as multi-year nonpayment of taxes coupled with serious deterioration—constitutes waste and can support forfeiture of a life estate and immediate possession in the remaindermen.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed termination of the reserved life estate because undisputed nonpayment of property taxes and severe deterioration showed waste as a matter of law, entitling the remaindermen to immediate possession even though the meaning of “occupancy” was not conclusively resolved on summary judgment.


McIntyre v. Scarbrough, 266 Ga. 824, 471 S.E.2d 199 (Ga. 1996)