Bealert v. Mitchell

Decision Date11 September 1979
Citation585 S.W.2d 417
PartiesEdward BEALERT, Administrator of the Estate of Allene S. Erd, Deceased, and Edward Bealert, Appellants, v. Roberta E. MITCHELL and First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Lexington, Appellees.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Glen S. Bagby, Brock, Brock & Bagby, Lexington, for appellants.

Charles C. Calk, Joseph H. Miller, Gess, Mattingly, Saunier & Atchison, James C. Clay, Lexington, for appellees.

Before HOWARD, REYNOLDS and WINTERSHEIMER, JJ.

WINTERSHEIMER, Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment entered April 10, 1978, which determined ownership of five joint savings certificate accounts opened by Robert L. Erd and Allene S. Erd, husband and wife, between 1969 and 1974. The Erds were married for thirty-nine years and had no children of their marriage, but Mr. Erd had a daughter by an earlier marriage. That daughter is the appellee here. On April 10, 1975, Mr. Erd had Mrs. Erd's name removed from all joint savings accounts in their names. An officer of the savings association required Mr. Erd to present a general power of attorney and also execute an instruction document before she removed Mrs. Erd's name from the accounts. On August 14, 1975, Mr. Erd returned to the financial institution and requested that his name be removed from the same accounts and directed that they be placed in the name of his daughter by an earlier marriage, the appellee. On November 2, 1975, Mr. Erd died and on January 23, 1976, Mrs. Erd died intestate. Mr. Erd died testate and Mrs. Roberta E. Mitchell, the appellee here, qualified as executrix of his estate. On October 8, 1976, Mrs. Erd's nephew, Edward Bealert, was appointed administrator of her estate and on the same date filed the original complaint in this action. The trial judge decided that the certificates were not an asset of the estate of Allene S. Erd. This appeal followed.

Appellants set out the following issues:

1) The trial court committed reversible error in finding that the joint accounts were revocable gifts, each to the other.
2) The trial judge committed reversible error in holding that the right to withdraw gives the right to appropriate.

This Court affirms the judgment of the trial court.

The trial court did not commit reversible error in finding that the joint accounts were established by contracts which provided that the deposits were a revocable and conditional gift, each to the other. The signature cards applicable to each specific savings account indicate that the association must act pursuant to the directions of any one or more of the joint tenant's instructions and must pay without liability to any one or the survivor of them at any time. The provisions of KRS 289.391 provides for the same result. Any interest Mrs. Erd had in the accounts was terminated by her husband when he removed her name from the accounts. This action was tantamount to a withdrawal of the funds. The record indicates that the only reason Mr. Erd did not withdraw the money from the accounts was to avoid the loss of interest and a penalty charge. We believe it is obvious that the right to withdraw encompasses the right to delete the name of another on a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • In re Estate of Fletcher
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • December 6, 2017
    ...the joint account, the other party’s interest in the affected funds ends. See id. (citing McEntire , 590 S.W.2d 241 ; Bealert v. Mitchell , 585 S.W.2d 417 (Ky. App. 1979) ). Other jurisdictions follow the Pennsylvania approach, under which funds removed from tenancy by the entirety accounts......
  • Wright v. Commercial and Sav. Bank
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • September 15, 1983
    ...Court of Special Appeals out-of-state cases such as McEntire v. McEntire Ex'r, 267 Ark. 169, 590 S.W.2d 241 (1979); Bealert v. Mitchell, 585 S.W.2d 417 (Ky.Ct.App.1979); and Hoffman v. Vetter, 117 Ohio App. 233, 192 N.E.2d 249 (1962), which do lend some support to the decision made by the C......
  • Grant Thornton, LLP v. Yung, 2014-CA-001957-MR
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • September 16, 2016
    ...as to judge their credibility, and therefore, is in the best position to make findings of fact. CR 52.01. See also Bealert v. Mitchell, 585 S.W.2d 417, 418 (Ky. App. 1979). On the other hand, the trial court's conclusions of law are subject to de novo review. A & A Mech., Inc. v. Thermal Eq......
  • Estate Of Haire v. Webster
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • March 20, 2019
    ...v. McEntire’s Estate, 267 Ark. 169, 590 S.W.2d 241 (1979) ; Kacirek v. Mangan, 489 P.2d 342 (Colo. Ct. App. 1971) ; Bealert v. Mitchell, 585 S.W.2d 417 (Ky. App. 1979). The Bank also argues that this Court essentially adopted the Arkansas approach for which it advocates in this appeal in ou......
  • 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