In re Cox' Estate

• Decision Date: 02 January 1962
• Citation: 405 Pa. 444,176 A.2d 894
• Parties: In re ESTATE of Charles M. COX, a/k/a Charles M. Cox, Jr., Deceased. Appeal of Claude M. COX, Administrator.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

176 A.2d 894

405 Pa. 444

In re ESTATE of Charles M. COX, a/k/a Charles M. Cox, Jr., Deceased. Appeal of Claude M. COX, Administrator.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

January 2, 1962.

J. Webster Jones, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Dunstan McNichol, Gilfillan, Gilpin & Brehman, Philadelphia, for appellee Marie J. Ward.

Before BELL, C. J., and MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, and ALPERN, JJ.

BELL, Chief Justice.

This case came before the Orphans' Court on petition by Marie J Ward, an answer by the administrator of the Estate of Charles M. Cox, and a reply by Ward. The issue is the ownership of a savings account. The lower Court decided that Marie J. Ward was the sole owner of said account, with all rights of ownership including the privilege of withdrawal, and that the account was not an asset of the Estate of Charles M. Cox.

The basic facts are undisputed.

On August 17 1956, decedent and petitioner opened savings account No. W 42883 in the Western Saving Fund Society of Philadelphia. In connection therewith they signed a signature card entitled 'Cox, Chas. M.--Ward, Marie J.--Either To Draw.' On the reverse side of the signature card was the following agreement which they also signed:

'It is agreed and understood that any and all sums that may from time to time stand in this account to our credit shall be owned by us as joint tenants and not as tenants in common, or by us as tenants by the entireties in the case of husband and wife; that said Western Saving Fund Society of Philadelphia is hereby authorized and directed to pay money unconditionally from such sums upon orders or receipts drawn by us or by either or any of us and, from time to time, to accept assignments made to it (but to it alone) by any one or more of us of any sums in this account as collateral security for any loan or loans that it may make to any one or more of us, and that in case of the death of either ^[1] or any of us the balance then remaining in said account shall be the absolute property of the survivor or survivors and said Society is hereby authorized and directed to deal with the survivor or survivors (with all the within rights of joint tenants) as the sole and absolute owner or owners of such sums. Each of us hereby authorizes the other, or any of the others, to endorse for deposit in this account any instrument payable to the order of all or either or any of us.

'Witness our hands and seal this 17 day of Aug 1956

'(s) Chas. M. Cox, Jr. (Seal)

'(s) Marie J. Ward (Seal)'

The account was started with a deposit of $3,000. Thereafter, decedent made a series of additional deposits totalling $2,250. All of the deposits were made with decedent's money. No withdrawals were ever made by either party.

Decedent died intestate on November 1, 1959. Decedent's brother was appointed administrator of the estate. He has possession of the passbook for the account. Petitioner has never had possession of it.

Petitioner made demand upon the administrator to deliver the passbook to her and upon the Western Saving Fund Society of Philadelphia to pay to her the balance in the account. The administrator has refused to deliver the passbook, and the Society has refused to pay unless it receives the passbook or there is an order of court directing it to pay. The present litigation was instituted to compel the administrator to deliver the passbook to petitioner and the Society to recognize petitioner as owner of the account.

It is clear from the above recited facts that a joint tenancy with right of survivorship was created by Charles M. Cox and Marie J Ward in this bank account. The fact that all the money in the account came from the decedent and that he had possession of the passbook are not sufficient, without more, to defeat this inter vivos gift. It must be recalled that only one person can have actual possession of a passbook. In Amour's Estate, 397 Pa. 262, 154 A.2d 502, the Court reiterated the law laid...