IN THE PROBATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTYSTATE OF GEORGIA
RE: ESTATE OF GENEVA S. CAFFREY*** Probate Case No.: 2002-1161** ___________________________________________________________________________
MR. STEGEMAN’S BRIEF IN RESPONSE TO MR. LILLIG’SMOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENTCOMES NOW, Mr. Stegeman, and pursuant to O.C.G.A. 9-11-56, files this Brief in Response to Mr. Lillig’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Following the filing of Objection to Mr. Lillig’s discharge, there is a six months period of Discovery. Mr. Lillighas not responded to the Objection according to paperwork filed by Mr. Turner when hefiled the Motion for Summary Judgement. The proper procedure in the State of GeorgiaProbate Courts in the State of Georgia that following a Motion such as the Motion of Objection filed by Mr. Stegeman there is a six month Discovery period. Considering theMotion objecting to Mr. Lillig’s discharge of Administration has gone unanswered, showsan admission of guilt.A genuine issue of material facts exists regarding the Objection to Mr. Lillig’sDischarge this is shown by the lack of answer to said Objection.Perjury was committed in order to keep the frivolous Superior Court lawsuitgoing. Again Mr. Turner went further on to perjure himself to Judge Hunter when heassured her that Mr. Lillig would have Letters of Testamentary within 180 days. Hecould not know that for fact as there were Two Wills. The hearing did not happenuntil two months after the 180 days and the question of the Two Wills still was notsettled even then. Not until Mr. Lillig was granted Personal Representation could Mr.Lillig be given letters of Testamentary. Therefore, the perjury committed gave theupper hand in favor of Mr. Lillig in a Superior Court suit. Fraud obviously had beencommitted.The laws governing the Probate Courts of Georgia state that if the Estate has been properly and fully administered and there are not enough funds to pay debts of the Estateto answer using 43-7-10. It is not to be used as an excuse for misappropriating funds,fraud, grand larceny, theft, etc.
53-7-10. (a) For purposes of this article, the term 'personal representative' includestemporary administrators.(b) When an action is brought against a personal representative in that person
srepresentative capacity, the personal representative may make the following defenses:(1) That person does not occupy the position of personal representative, as alleged;(2) That no assets have come into the hands of the personal representative;