After their elderly father changed a trust and beneficiary designations, siblings Robert Slosberg, Suzanne Giller, and Lynne Amy Seidner litigated claims that the changes were procured through undue influence. A jury found for Slosberg concerning a trust, an IRA account, and an agency account, and the superior court imposed a constructive trust for his share of the assets. The sisters appealed. The Court of Appeals of Georgia held that Slosberg’s challenge to the trust violated its enforceable in-terrorem clause, which required forfeiture of benefits upon initiating proceedings contesting the trust. That clause did not apply to the IRA or agency accounts. The court also held that the superior court lacked a sufficient finding of fraud or unjust enrichment to support the constructive trust imposed over those accounts. It reversed the judgment as to the trust claim and constructive-trust remedy and remanded for further proceedings. The court emphasized that policy objections to trust no-contest clauses must be addressed by the General Assembly, not resolved by judicially creating a good-faith exception.