Barton v. Hooker

Decision Date22 March 1955
Docket NumberNo. 35708,35708
Citation1955 OK 78,283 P.2d 514
PartiesCharles O. BARTON et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Tono L. HOOKER, Defendant in Error.
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

1. A person who owns the money or credit which creates a bank account may by gift vest in another, named as co-depositor, a joint interest and right of survivorship while retaining a similar interest and right in such account.

2. Where donor and donee enter into a written agreement containing words expressing a clear and unequivocal intent on the part of the donor to make the donee a joint owner of a bank account with the right of survivorship, upon the donor's death the donee is entitled to the account.

3. Upon the death of the co-owner of a United States Savings Bond, the surviving co-owner becomes the sole owner of the bond to the exclusion of the estate of the decedent, where the United States Treasury regulations under which the bond was issued so provide.

Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County; W. Lee Johnson, Judge.

Action by Tono L. Hooker against Charles O. Barton and Chandos A. Hoskyns, Special Administrators of the estate of Flora B. Barton, deceased, to determine the ownership of certain bank accounts and United States Savings Bonds. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Manatt, Knight & Knight, F. A. Bodwitz, Lewis C. Johnson, Milsten, Milsten, Johnston & Morehead, Tulsa, for plaintiffs in error.

G. C. Spillers and G. C. Spillers, Jr., Tulsa, for defendant in error.

WILLIAMS, Justice.

This case involves the question of whether a savings account in the First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa, a savings account in the Peoples State Bank of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and seven United States Savings Bonds of $1,000 denomination each, all standing in the joint names of Flora B. Barton and Tono L. Hooker are the sole property of Tono L. Hooker, by reason of the death of Flora B. Barton, or whether said accounts and bonds are assets of the estate of Flora B. Barton, deceased.

Plaintiff, Tono L. Hooker, was the nephew of Flora B. Barton, now deceased. He brings this action against the defendants, Charles O. Barton and Chandos A. Hoskyns, Special Administrators of the Estate of Flora B. Barton, deceased, alleging, so far as is material to this appeal, that he and Flora B. Barton, during her lifetime, had entered into a contract of joint tenancy with right of survivorship in regard to a savings account in the First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and that at the time of the death of Flora B. Barton, the account contained the sum of $3,329.07 which belonged to plaintiff as surviving joint tenant. Plaintiff further alleged that defendants had in their possession seven Series E United States Savings Bonds, of $1,000 denomination each, which were made payable to Flora B. Barton or Tono L. Hooker, and that as surviving joint tenant, the plaintiff was the sole owner of said bonds.

Defendants contested plaintiff's claims, and by cross-petition alleged that plaintiff had wrongfully withdrawn $6,320.27 from the savings account of Flora B. Barton after her death, which funds had been on deposit in the Peoples State Bank of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Plaintiff answered defendants' cross-petition by admitting that he had withdrawn these funds, but asserting that such were his property pursuant to a joint tenancy with right of survivorship contract which he and Miss Barton had entered into with said bank, and that as surviving joint tenant he was the sole owner of these funds.

The trial court rendered judgment for plaintiff, holding that he was the owner of both bank accounts and the seven United States Savings Bonds, as surviving joint tenant, and defendants appeal.

The evidence is in the main, uncontroverted. It reveals that on December 28, 1948, Flora B. Barton and her nephew, the plaintiff, went to the savings department of the First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa, for the purpose of opening an account. At that time in the presence of the manager of the savings department and in the presence of each other, they signed a joint savings account with right of survivorship contract upon a form prepared by the bank. An initial deposit of $1,794.44 was made in the account by Miss Barton and thereafter an additional deposit of $1,501.60 was made by her. It is conceded that these deposits came from money belonging to Flora B. Barton. There were no withdrawals from the account by either of the parties.

The situation with respect to the Peoples State Bank account is virtually the same. On March 29, 1946, Flora B. Barton and plaintiff set up a joint savings account in the original amount of $2,510. The account was set up on a form prepared by the bank and upon the face thereof it provided that the money on deposit might be withdrawn by either of the parties. On the reverse side of this card was a contract for the creation of this account as a joint account with right of survivorship which was duly signed by Flora B. Barton and plaintiff. All of the money that went into this account was furnished by Miss Barton and plaintiff made no withdrawals therefrom during her lifetime.

On March 12, 1950, Miss Barton died, and on July 21, 1950, plaintiff closed out the account at Peoples State Bank by withdrawing the balance on deposit in the sum of $6,320.27.

The seven Series E United States Savings Bonds in controversy were discovered in the safe deposit box of Flora B. Barton in the First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa, Oklahoma, after he death. All these bonds had been issued in December, 1946, and upon their face were made payable to Flora B. Barton or Tono L. Hooker. Until the death of Miss Barton, plaintiff had a right of access to this safety deposit box. It is conceded that these bonds were purchased by Miss Barton with her own funds.

Joint tenancies have long been recognized as a part of the body of the common law of this state. Kilgore v. Parrott, 197 Okl. 77, 168 P.2d 886. In Royston v. Besett, 183 Okl. 643, 83 P.2d 874, it was held that the survivor was the owner of a deposit in the bank and stock in a building and loan association as a joint tenant without express words of joint tenancy or survivorship.

In 1945 the legislature passed an act making statutory provision for estates in joint tenancy, which is now found in 60 O.S.1951 § 74, the pertinent provisions of which are as follows:

'A joint interest is one owned by several persons in either real or personal property in equal shares, being a joint title created by a single instrument, will or transfer when expressly declared in the instrument, will or transfer to be a joint tenancy, or as between husband and wife a tenancy by entirety or joint tenancy as the grantor may elect, or when granting or devising to executors or trustees as joint tenants. A tenancy by entirety can only be created between husband and wife.

'Such joint tenancy or tenancy by entirety may be created by transfer to persons as joint tenants or tenants by entirety from an owner or a joint owner to himself and one or more persons, or from tenants in common to themselves, or by copartners in voluntary partition, * * *'. (Emphasis added.)

Thus it may be seen that the statute specifically authorizes the creation of a joint tenancy in personal property by a transfer from the owner thereof to himself and one or more other persons. This is exactly what Miss Barton did in connection with the two savings accounts in question. She was the owner of the funds placed in these accounts, but transferred them to herself and plaintiff as joint tenants by a written instrument signed by both herself and plaintiff. We do not see what more she could have done to create the joint tenancy.

It might be noted...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Sommer v. Sommer
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • October 14, 1997
    ...except when a contrary intention plainly appears,...."17 City of Muskogee v. Landry, Okl., 567 P.2d 988, 990 (1977); Barton v. Hooker, Okl., 283 P.2d 514, 517 (1955); see also MB Construction Co. v. O'Brien Commerce Center Associates, 63 Wash.App. 151, 816 P.2d 1274, 1276 (1991), citing Nor......
  • Melton v. Ensley
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • October 10, 1967
    ...that the association stock * * * (was) jointly owned by herself and Abbie P. Flesher, with the right of survivorship.' In Barton v. Hooker, Okl., 283 P.2d 514, 517, Miss Barton 'was the owner of the funds placed in these accounts, but transferred them to herself and (her nephew) as joint te......
  • In re Estate of MacFarline
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • November 7, 2000
    ...account upon the death of the other joint tenant. City National Bank & Trust Co. v. Conrad, 1966 OK 132, 416 P.2d 942; Barton v. Hooker, 1955 OK 78, 283 P.2d 514. In other words, joint tenancy funds do not become part of a deceased joint tenant's estate, but become the sole property of the ......
  • Baker v. Baker
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
    • October 29, 1985
    ...burden of proof in Oklahoma is on that party who challenges the joint tenant's right to possess the entire amount. Accord Barton v. Hooker, 283 P.2d 514 (Okla.1955). The case is reversed and remanded with instructions that a rebuttable presumption exists that each joint tenant owns the enti......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT