Georgia § 23-2-58 - Confidential relations defined.

§ 23-2-58. Confidential relations defined.

Any relationship shall be deemed confidential, whether arising from nature, created by law, or resulting from contracts, where one party is so situated as to exercise a controlling influence over the will, conduct, and interest of another or where, from a similar relationship of mutual confidence, the law requires the utmost good faith, such as the relationship between partners; principal and agent; guardian or conservator and minor or ward; personal representative or temporary administrator and heir, legatee, devisee, or beneficiary; trustee and beneficiary; and similar fiduciary relationships. (Orig. Code 1863, § 3108; Code 1868, § 3120; Code 1873, § 3177; Code 1882, § 3177; Civil Code 1895, § 4030; Civil Code 1910, § 4627; Code 1933, § 37-707; Ga. L. 2020, p. 377, § 2-26/HB 865.) The 2020 amendment, effective January 1, 2021, substituted "partners; principal and agent; guardian or conservator and minor or ward; personal representative or temporary administrator and heir, legatee, devisee, or beneficiary; trustee and beneficiary; and similar fiduciary relationships" for "partners, principal and agent, etc" at the end of the Code section. Cross references. - Agency generally, T. 10, C. 6. Confidential relationships for purposes of exclusion of evidence, § 24-5-501 et seq. Law reviews. - For annual survey article discussing wills, trusts and administration of estates, see 52 Mercer L. Rev. 481 (2000). For article, "Georgia's Law of Undue Influence in Gift-Making," see 5 Ga. St. B.J. 12 (2000). For article, "Common Fact Patterns of Stock Broker Fraud and Misconduct," see 7 Ga. St. B.J. 14 (2002). For survey article on wills, trusts, guardianships, and fiduciary administration for the period from June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2003, see 55 Mercer L. Rev. 459 (2003). For annual survey of law of wills, trusts, guardianships, and fiduciary administration, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 457 (2004). For survey article on wills, trusts, guardianships, and fiduciary administration, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 447 (2007). For article, "Holmes v. Grubman: The Supreme Court of Georgia Balances Financial Advisor Common Law Liability and Investor Protection," see 16 (No. 5) Ga. St. B.J. 20 (2011). For article, "What Duty of Care Does a Homeowner Association Owe Its Members?," see 22 Ga. St. Bar J. 19 (Dec. 2016). For note, "The Great Escape: How One Plaintiff's Sidestep of a Mandatory Arbitration Clause Was Applied to a Class in Bickerstaff v. SunTrust Bank," see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 539 (2017).