Your state’s pack. New issues arrive periodically on Mondays. Bookmark it. I built this for the Georgia T&E solo who knows O.C.G.A. Title 53 (the Revised Probate Code of 1998) cold but still loses an afternoon a week hunting the current homestead number, the Elderly & Disabled Waiver Program (CCSP & SOURCE, run by DCH) slot posture, whether the latest Georgia bar ethics opinion changes how you scope an engagement, or whether a recent Court of Appeals of Georgia decision just moved the law on capacity, undue influence, or a trustee’s duties. What’s below is what mattered in Georgia lately — the week’s developments and the recent rulings from the bench.
For licensed attorneys. This pack is general legal information and professional commentary for practicing attorneys — it is not legal advice, does not apply to any specific matter, and creates no attorney-client relationship. Verify every authority against the cited primary source before relying on it with a client. Published by Mike Moss, a Utah-admitted attorney, as an AI-enablement information product; it is not an offer of legal services and is not a representation that the author is admitted to practice in your jurisdiction.
Three developments from the last several weeks that I think actually matter to a Georgia T&E solo. Each one has a read that lands on your practice specifically — and each one comes with the citation so you can verify the detail yourself before you use it with a client.
Per the official ‘AS PASSED’ enrolled bill, HB 1024 amends O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100(a)(1): the debtor-relief homestead rises from $21,500 ($43,000 joint) to $50,000, with $100,000 for a primary residence owned by both spouses, effective July 1, 2026 and indexed from 2031. State both the old and new figures with the effective date until then.
Two places this bites immediately: creditor-exemption schedules in Georgia bankruptcy filings, and the Medicaid home-equity analysis where the exempt homestead figure feeds the math. A form library refreshed before July 1 still carries $21,500 — every pleading out of it after that date cites a superseded number. The fix is fifteen minutes in the template, but only if someone noticed the date.
Ga. HB 1024 (2026), amending O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100 · official enrolled bill: gov.georgia.gov · signed legislation · eff. July 1, 2026
The toolkit is a “living document” tied to Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1, 1.5, 1.6, 3.3, 5.1, and 5.3. It expressly flags hallucinated citations as a competence/candor problem and confidentiality (Rule 1.6) exposure when client data is fed to a third-party model. There is no formal Georgia AI advisory opinion yet — this toolkit is the Bar’s operative guidance.
If you use AI-assisted drafting in a Georgia T&E practice, this is the document your conduct is now measured against. Verify every machine-produced citation before it leaves your office, and treat any client data entering an AI tool as a Rule 1.6 question first. The toolkit is also a useful checklist when an out-of-state vendor pitches an “AI estate-plan” product.
State Bar of Georgia Generative AI Toolkit (Nov. 19, 2025) · gabar.org/programs/law-practice-management/ai-and-emerging-tech
O.C.G.A. §§ 44-17-1 to 44-17-7 created Georgia’s first statutory revocable transfer-on-death deed. The beneficiary must record an affidavit within nine months of the owner’s death or the interest reverts. Older “Georgia has no TOD deed” copy is stale.
This is a structural intake change, not a footnote. A TOD deed is now a real probate-avoidance option to discuss at planning — but the 9-month beneficiary-affidavit deadline is a malpractice trap if your post-death checklist doesn’t calendar it. Build the recording step into your administration workflow before a client relies on the instrument.
O.C.G.A. § 44-17-1 et seq. (SB 420, 2024, eff. July 1, 2024) · LEGIS.GA.GOV · SB 420
Decisions that bind a Georgia practitioner — Georgia’s appellate courts and the federal courts covering Georgia, including the U.S. Eleventh Circuit — read for what actually changes how you draft, advise, and plan. Trusts and estates broadly, not Medicaid alone: wills and capacity, undue influence, fiduciary duty, trust construction, and estate recovery. One read, the holding, and the official cite.
A pro se appellant sought review in Douglas County Superior Court of a probate court order appointing a guardian and conservator for an adult ward. Because Douglas County has more than 90,000 people, its probate court is an “Article 6” probate court under OCGA §§ 15-9-120(2) and 15-9-123(a), whose final orders are directly appealable to the Court of Appeals — so the superior court correctly found it had no jurisdiction. It then dismissed the appeal and refused to transfer it. The Court of Appeals vacated. Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. I, Par. VIII requires any court to transfer a civil case in which jurisdiction lies elsewhere, and OCGA § 5-3-13(b), enacted in 2022, says the clerk “shall promptly transfer” a misfiled petition for review. The court remanded with direction to transfer the appeal together with the probate court record — and expressly disapproved any language in Spence v. Department of Behavioral Health & Developmental Disabilities that could be read to authorize dismissal instead of transfer.
Georgia is one of the few states where the appellate route out of probate court depends on the county’s population, and getting it wrong used to be fatal. This decision converts that trap into a detour: a timely-filed appeal in the wrong Georgia court now gets moved, not killed. Two boundaries worth holding onto. First, transfer cures the wrong forum — it does not cure an untimely notice of appeal. The same court applied that limit on July 27, 2026 in In re Estate of Tien Thi Davis, dismissing a probate appeal filed 62 days after the final order and holding that an allegation the order was “procured by fraud” did not extend the OCGA § 5-6-38(a) window. Second, know which probate court you are in before you draft the notice: an Article 6 court goes straight to the appellate courts, while a smaller county’s probate court goes to superior court for a de novo proceeding first. That single fact changes whether your client gets a new trial or a record review.
Stephanie Clark v. Coretta Paul Gunn et al., No. A25A1875, 378 Ga. App. 315, 925 S.E.2d 762 (Ga. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2026) — judgment vacated, remanded with direction; prior contrary language disapproved.
This week in Georgia for the T&E solo with Georgia Medicaid clients: the developments from the State Bar of Georgia (Fiduciary Law Section) and the Department of Community Health that actually moved your practice this period — each one primary-source verified.
Bar and Medicaid changes land on different schedules and aren’t indexed by practice focus. Every item here was checked against its primary source, with the link, so you can verify before relying on it.