Anuszkiewicz v. Anuszkiewicz
Decision Date | 23 February 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 3--676A146,3--676A146 |
Parties | Weronika ANUSZKIEWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roman ANUSZKIEWICZ and Zofia Anuszkiewicz, his wife, Defendants-Appellees. |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Martin A. Karr, East Chicago, for plaintiff-appellant.
David M. Rybicki, of Callahan & Rybicki, East Chicago, for defendants-appellees.
Plaintiff-appellant Weronika Anuszkiewicz commenced this action against defendants-appellees Roman Anuszkiewicz and Zofia Anuszkiewicz to recover proceeds from the sale of real estate formerly held by Weronika with her husband in a tenancy by the entireties. After a trial to the court on facts stipulated by the parties, judgment was entered for Roman and his wife Zofia. The sole issue raised on appeal concerns whether the proceeds of a sale of entirety property must accrue to the wife upon her husband's death even though he had deposited a portion of them in a joint bank account with his son.
The parties hereto having submitted a verified statement of facts are mutually bound by their stipulation. However we view only the pertinent portions, and these, in a light favorable to the trial court's determination, thus not construing as admitted facts obviously intended to be in controversy. Faught v. State (1974), Ind.App., 319 N.E.2d 843.
The statement of facts, in pertinent part, is as follows:
'VERIFIED STATEMENT OF FACTS
'1. The plaintiff herein, Weronika Anuszkiewicz, and one Kazmierz (sic) Anuszkiewicz were duly married on July 5, 1948, in England.
'4. That on September 26, 1959, the said plaintiff herein, Weronika Anuszkiewicz, and her husband, Kazmierz (sic) Anuszkiewicz, did, as husband and wife and as tenants by the entireties, acquire the following described real estate in the City of East Chicago, Lake County, Indiana, to-wit: Lot 35, except the North 9 feet thereof, in Block 16, in Calumet Addition to East Chicago, as per plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 8, page 32, in the Office of the Recorder of Lake County, Indiana,
said real estate more commonly known as 4760 Parrish Avenue in said city, county and state.
'5. That on or about January 17, 1972, the said plaintiff herein and her said husband, Kazmierz (sic) Anuszkiewicz, did sell the above described real estate to the defendants herein, Roman Anuszkiewicz and Zofia Anuszkiewicz, husband and wife, for the sum of $40,000.00.
'6. The terms of the sale of said real estate were as follows, to-wit: a) The sum of $20,000.00 upon the execution of the Warranty Deed (January 17, 1972), and, which amount was paid to plaintiff, herein. b) The balance of the purchase price to be payable evidenced by a promissory note to that effect. (Correction as appears in original.)
As a general matter, property held by the entireties creates an estate owned by the husband and wife as one unit. Each is seized of the whole estate rather than an individual portion, so that upon the death of one, the survivor holds under the original grant. Accordingly no transfer of the property occurs between the spouses by survivorship. St. of Ind., Ind. Dept. of Rev. v. Est. of Weinstein (1967), 141 Ind.App. 395, 228 N.E.2d 23, rehearing denied, 141 Ind.App. 399, 229 N.E.2d 741 (transfer denied); Vonville v. Dexter (1948), 118 Ind.App. 187, 76 N.E.2d 856 (transfer denied). Such form of ownership has been recognized and supported for its essential characteristics of promoting marital security by restricting a third party's ability to diminish the entirety property through an execution or settlement against it. Mercer v. Coomler (1903), 32 Ind.App. 533, 69 N.E. 202 (transfer denied). Nevertheless this attribute is not intended to unduly restrict the alienation of entirety property under appropriate circumstances. Once a husband and wife have joined as grantors in the sale of real estate, the proceeds may be expended or kept in accordance with their mutual wishes. Rogers v. Shewmaker (1901), 27 Ind.App. 631, 60 N.E. 462 (transfer denied).
It is in this context that we consider the case at bar. Plaintiff-appellant Weronika Anuszkiewicz asserts that since the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Van Bibber v. Norris
...in a light favorable to the judgment. City of Hammond v. Drangmeister, (1977) Ind.App., 364 N.E.2d 157, 159; Anuszkiewicz v. Anuszkiewicz, (1977) Ind.App., 360 N.E.2d 230, 231. Runk and Van Bibber were the two individuals holding the most intimate knowledge of the circumstances leading up t......
-
Bayes v. Isenberg
...unit. State Department of State Revenue v. Union Bank and Trust Company, (1978) Ind.App., 380 N.E.2d 1279; Anuszkiewicz v. Anuszkiewicz, (1977) 172 Ind.App. 279, 360 N.E.2d 230; Wallace v. Wallace, (1953) 123 Ind.App. 454, 110 N.E.2d 514. It is true that property owned as an estate by entir......
-
Agnew, Matter of
...(1982). Each co-tenant is seised of the whole, which is taken by one upon the death of the other. Id.; Anuszkiewicz v. Anuszkiewicz, 172 Ind.App. 279, 360 N.E.2d 230, 232 (1977). Generally, neither has an interest severable without the consent of the other, Thornburg v. Wiggins, 135 Ind. 17......
-
In re King
...are commingled with nonexempt funds, the exemption is lost. In support of this contention the Trustee cites Anuszkiewicz v. Anuszkiewicz, 172 Ind.App. 279, 360 N.E.2d 230 (1977). However, that case dealt with the application of the tenants by the entireties doctrine under Indiana law and ha......