Green's Estate, In re, 33190
| Decision Date | 19 May 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 33190,33190 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | ESTATE of Nathan B. GREEN, Deceased. May ROE and Clarence Roe, Appellants, v. Leona MEEKER, as Administratrix of the Estate of Nathan B. Green, Deceased; and Rachel Chapman, Clifford B. Green, Blanche C. Hager, Stanley R. Green, Bernice Bastain, and Bessie Doan, heirs at law of Nathan B. Green, Deceased, Respondents. |
Bigelow & Manier, Olympia, for appellants.
Pebbles & Swanson, Brodie & Fristoe, Olympia, for respondent.
Nathan B. Green owned share account No. 5575 in the Olympia Federal Savings and Loan Association on February 21, 1952, on which date he went to the association's place of business and, on the blank side of a subscription and signature card, wrote the following:
'2/21/52
'This will authorize the Olympia Federal Savings & Loan Assn to add the names of Mrs May Roe or Clarence Roe to Sa. account no 5575, making the account red Nathan B. Green or Mrs. May Roe or Clarence Roe with full withdrawal privileges
x Nathan B Creen'
This is apparently entirely in Mr. Green's handwriting.
The other side of the card reads as follows (the portions in italics being written in ink, again apparently in the handwriting of Mr. Green), and it is conceded that the signature appearing thereon is his:
'The undersigned thereby subscribe for a membership and for a _____* share account in the Olympia Federal Savings and Loan Association in the joint names of the undersigned as joint tenants with the right of survivorship and not as tenants in common, subject to the laws of the United States, the rules and regulations of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and the charter and by-laws of the association as they now are or as they may hereafter be amended.
'It is understood and agreed that the membership and share account subscribed for are issued by the association, and receipt of Pass Book and/or Certificate along with a copy of the charter and by-laws in acknowledged by the undersigned. Specimen signatures are shown below and the association is authorized to act without further inquiry in accordance with writings bearing any such signature; it being understood and agreed that any one of the undersigned who shall first act shall have power to act in all matters related to this membership and share account, subject to the by-laws of the association, whether the other person or persons named in the Pass Book and/or Certificate be living or not.
'Nathan B. Green Signature
________ Signature
P. O. Box 604 Street and Number
________ Street and Number
Olympia Wash. City and State
________ City and State
Green, Nathan B. or Mrs May Roe or Clarence Roe' (Italics ours.)
From that time the account stood in the association records in the name of 'Green, Nathan B. or Mrs. May Roe or Clarence Roe,' and so appears in the 'share account' book or passbook.
Neither Mrs. May Roe, a sister of Nathan B. Green, nor Clarence Roe, her son, ever signed such a membership subscription and signature card. They had no knowledge that Mr. Green had placed their names on the account until after his death, which occurred June 26, 1952.
The administratrix of Mr. Green's estate claimed the account as one of the assets of the estate. His heirs, other than Mrs. Roe, joined with the administratrix in contending that the savings account is an asset of the estate.
Mrs. May Roe and Clarence Roe filed objections to the final report and account of the administratrix, claiming the account by right of survivorship. The trial court dismissed their objections and held the account in question to be a part of the assets of the estate of Nathan B. Green, deceased. Mrs. May Roe and Clarence Roe appeal.
The first question to be considered is whether the action of Mr. Green on February 21, 1952, and the association's assent thereto, were sufficient to raise a presumption that Mr. Green, Mrs. Roe, and Clarence Roe were joint tenants with right of survivorship in Mr. Green's savings account. If the answer is no, the appeal is concluded and the judgment must be affirmed. If the answer is yes, another question arises: Was that presumption conclusive or rebuttable? And if the answer to that question is that it was rebuttable, we have a third question: Was the presumption rebutted?
To determine the answer to the first question, we must consider Mr. Green's action in the light of the section of the savings and loan association act which reads as follows:
RCW 33.20.030, cf. Laws of 1945, chapter 235, § 40, p. 671.
Read literally, the savings and loan statute (and the printed membership application and signature card) seems to contemplate the opening of a new account by two or more members as 'joint tenants with right of survivorship.' But where, as here, it is clear that it is the intention of the owner of a account and of the savings and loan association to change the status of an existing account by making an addtional party or parties 'joint tenants with right of survivorship,' such a change in status may be effected without the formality of closing the old account and opening a new. Nelson v. Olympia Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 1938, 193 Wash. 222, 74 P.2d 1019. (This case construed a 1933 statute, Laws of 1933, chapter 183, § 41, p. 729, but is unquestionably authority for the position here taken.)
Creation of the status recognized by the statute (or the presumption of that status) depends upon the agreement between the person who opens the account (or the owner of an account already opened) and the savings and loan association, and not upon the knowledge of other individuals that their names have been added to the account as joint tenants with right of survivorship, nor upon their express consent thereto. Tobas v. Mutual Bldg. & Loan Ass'n, 1946, 147 Neb. 676, 24 N.W.2d 870; In re Fast's Estate, 1950, 169 Kan. 238, 218 P.2d 184.
Thus, when a member of a savings and loan association has authorized the association, and the association has assented, to add the names of one or more individuals (to whom we shall refer as co-owners, to distinguish them from the original owner) to his savings account as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, that presumptively becomes the relationship of the owner and co-owners even though the latter were not present at the time, never signed a signature card or application for membership, and knew nothing about the transaction until after the death of the owner of the account. RCW 33.20.030; Nelson v. Olympia Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, supra; Munson v. Haye, 1948, 29 Wash.2d 733, 189 P.2d 464; In re Fast's Estate, supra; Tobas v. Mutual Bldg. & Loan Ass'n, supra. For cases dealing with bank deposits rather than savings and loan association accounts, see In re Rehfeld's Estate, 1917, 198 Mich. 249, 164 N.W. 372; In re Muckle's Estate, Sur.1942, 35 N.Y.S.2d 391; Schrage v. Schram, D.C.1941, 39 F.Supp. 906 (applying Michigan law). Contra: See Doubler v. Doubler, 1952, 412 Ill. 597, 107 N.E.2d 789, based upon peculiar wording of the Illinois statute providing that an agreement permitting payment to survivors must be signed by all parties. That opinion contains no mention of Vaughan v. Millikin Nat. Bank, 1931, 263 Ill.App. 301, where a contrary result was reached.
We are satisfied that the transaction between Nathan B. Green and the savings and loan association amounted to an agreement between them to create a joint tenancy with the right of survivorship, in the names of Mr. Green, Mrs. Roe, and Clarence Roe. That, presumptively, became the status of the account. We must now determine whether that presumption was conclusive or rebuttable.
The statutes relating to joint tenancy with right of survivorship in accounts in banks and trust companies, RCW 30.20.015; Laws of 1951, chapter 18, § 1, p. 36, and in mutual savings banks, RCW 32.12.030(3), cf. Laws of 1929, chapter 123, § 2, p. 280, contain the following provision, which does not appear in the above quoted statute, RCW 33.20.030, relating to joint tenancy with right of survivorship in savings accounts in savings and loan associations:...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Hair v. O'Hair
... ... In September of 1968, defendant had distributed to him, from the sale of the estate of his mother in Illinois, $203,715.11, of which he placed $150,000.00 in a savings account with ... ...
-
Stamets' Estate, In re
...v. First Citizens Nat. Bank, 77 S.D. 106, 86 N.W.2d 526, 529; Krueger v. Williams, 163 Tex. 545, 359 S.W.2d 48; Green's Estate v. Meeker, 46 Wash.2d 637, 283 P.2d 989, 991; Kelberger v. First Federal Savings & Loan Assn., 270 Wis. 434, 71 N.W.2d 257, 260; In re Pfeifer's Estate, 1 Wis.2d 60......
-
Wright v. Bloom
... ... (In re Estate of Thompson [1981], 66 Ohio St.2d 433, 20 O.O.3d 371, 423 N.E.2d 90, paragraph two of the syllabus, ... ...
-
Schwarz v. Schwarz
... ... to show an intent to transmute the property from separate to community property." In re Estate of Borghi, 167 Wash.2d 480, 484, 219 P.3d 932 (2009). It will retain that character as long as it ... ...