Compton v. Hendricks

• Decision Date: 22 January 1923
• Docket Number: 3238.
• Citation: 115 S.E. 654,154 Ga. 808
• Parties: COMPTON v. HENDRICKS ET AL.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

115 S.E. 654

154 Ga. 808

COMPTON v. HENDRICKS ET AL.

No. 3238.

Supreme Court of Georgia

January 22, 1923

Error from Superior Court, Madison County; W. L. Hodges, Judge.

Suit by G. M. Compton, executor, against A. C. Hendricks and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

Thos J. Shackelford and Shackelford & Meadow, all of Athens, for plaintiff in error.

B. T Mosely, of Danielsville, and W. W. Stark, of Commerce, for defendants in error.

ATKINSON J.

A husband and wife were of the ages 87 and 79, respectively. The wife had $2,000, derived from the sale of her separate estate, which she delivered to her husband to deposit in a designated bank. The husband deposited the money and received two time certificates of deposit for equal amounts. After one year they were renewed for the principal and accumulated interest, so that each new certificate was for $1,050. The new certificates were identical in all respects, a copy of one of which being as follows:

Certificate of Deposit.

No 1488. Bank of Bowman. $1,050.00

Bowman, Ga., Jan. 8, 1921.

Mrs. Mary Hendrick and A. C. Hendrick has deposited in this bank one thousand and fifty and no/100 dollars, payable to the order of self in current funds, on return of this certificate properly indorsed, with interest at the rate of five per cent. per annum, payable Jan. 8, 1922. No interest thereafter.

Not subject to check.

C. E. Teasley, Cashier.

Payable to either or the survivor.

The wife died on May 5, 1921, leaving a will; and the executor instituted an action against the husband and the bank, seeking to enjoin payment of the certificates to the husband, and to have a decree entitling the executor to one-half of the amount represented by the certificates. On the final trial there was evidence though contradicted, tending to show, and sufficient to authorize a finding, that the wife knew the contents and form of each certificate, and that in making the deposit she had directed her husband to have the certificates of deposit so made that the money should be payable to both or either of them if living, or, if one be dead, to the survivor. There was no evidence from which the jury could have inferred that the words, "payable to either or the survivor," were placed on the certificates subsequently to their original execution. Under appropriate instructions the court submitted the case as controlled by the issue of whether or not the wife authorized the deposit to be made in the bank in the manner stated in the certificates and "payable to either or the survivor," as indicated...