## Facts

- Cora Belle Dorsey owned the disputed real property and died in 1989.
- Dorsey’s will devised the property to Katie Evelyn Day and Nancy Slaick “share and share alike.”
- In 1990, Day and Slaick went to an attorney to execute reciprocal deeds intended to ensure survivorship while reserving life estates for each grantor.
- Day executed a quitclaim deed to Slaick stating consideration as “LOVE AND AFFECTION AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION” and reserving a life estate to Day.
- A reciprocal deed from Slaick to Day was reportedly executed but was not recorded and could not later be located.
- In 1991, acting as executor, Slaick filed an assent to devise stating fee-simple title vested in Day and Slaick under Dorsey’s will.
- Day died in 2006; her will devised her interest in jointly owned real property to four children other than Slaick and specifically referenced the inherited property.
- Emmett J. Arnold, as administrator of Day’s estate, disputed whether Day’s deed to Slaick was effective, asserting lack of consideration, fraud in the inception, and an after-acquired title problem.
- The superior court (after transfer from probate court) held a bench trial and declared the deed void solely for lack of “valid and valuable consideration.”

## Issues

1. Whether a deed is void for lack of consideration when it recites “love and affection and other good and valuable consideration” without specifying a dollar amount.
2. Whether the deed was invalid due to fraud in the inception.
3. Whether the deed was affected by after-acquired title based on the timing of the conveyance relative to the devise and executor’s assent.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the ruling that the deed was void for lack of consideration.
- The court held that the consideration language (“love and affection and other good and valuable consideration”) was legally sufficient and did not render the deed void as a matter of law.
- The court vacated the remainder of the judgment and remanded for the trial court to enter findings and rulings on fraud in the inception and after-acquired title, which had been pleaded but not addressed.

## Legal Principles

- In a bench trial, factual findings are upheld if supported by any evidence, but legal conclusions are reviewed for legal error.
- A deed is not void merely because consideration is non-monetary or not itemized; “good” consideration (including love and affection) may support a conveyance.
- A trial court must address other potentially dispositive challenges to a deed’s validity when its sole stated ground for relief is reversed on appeal.

## Conclusion

The appellate court held that the deed could not be declared void solely because its consideration clause recited love and affection rather than a stated monetary amount, and it remanded for the trial court to decide the unresolved claims of fraud and after-acquired title.


Slaick v. Arnold, 307 Ga. App. 410, 705 S.E.2d 206 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010)