Opinion ID: 3186185
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Validity of Restriction and Reverter

Text: The threshold substantive question in regard to the Deed is the validity of the Restriction and the Reverter. And, it is plain that they are valid and enforceable. As the superior court noted in its ruling, in general the type of forfeiture as in this case is invalid as an impermissible restraint on alienation; however, Georgia recognizes an exception to the general rule in the situation in which real property is transferred to a charitable group for charitable purposes. First Rebecca Baptist Church, Inc. v. Atl. Cotton Mills, 263 Ga. 688, 689 (3) (440 SE2d 159) (1993). The reasoning is that inasmuch as a donor may make a gift for charitable purposes which is perpetual in duration, as a corollary of this right and in order to effectuate the primary purpose of the gift, the donor may impose a condition that the gifted property is not to be alienated, but is to continue in the hands of the donee in perpetuity. Id. Public policy favors giving the donor's distinct charitable interest greater weight than general prohibitions against the remoteness of vesting and restrictions on alienation. Id. Here, there is little question that by the Deed, donor CAU intended to gift the Property to what it deemed a charitable organization,3 MBC, and did 3 This Court makes no finding regarding MBC’s legal status as a charitable organization. 6 so in order to accomplish educational purposes, which are proper matters of charity. See Moore v. Wells, 212 Ga. 446, 451 (93 SE2d 731) (1956).