Kaplan v. Greenberg, No. 48194

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtSIMON
Citation688 S.W.2d 801
PartiesHarry KAPLAN, Appellant, v. Marvin GREENBERG and Sandra Greenberg, Respondents.
Docket NumberNo. 48194
Decision Date02 April 1985

Page 801

688 S.W.2d 801
Harry KAPLAN, Appellant,
Marvin GREENBERG and Sandra Greenberg, Respondents.
No. 48194.
Missouri Court of Appeals,
Eastern District, Division Three.
April 2, 1985.

Page 802

Susman, Schermer, Rimmel & Parker, J. Leonard Schermer, Clayton, for appellant.

Stephen H. Gilmore, St. Louis, for respondents.

SIMON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant, Harry Kaplan, appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County finding that certain assets he sought to reclaim in an action seeking an injunction and accounting against his daughter and her husband, Sandra and Marvin Greenberg, respondents, rightfully belonged in part to daughter, Sandra. We dismiss the appeal.

Appellant claims exclusive right, title and interest to four assets which are the subject of this action: a Phoenix Money Market Fund valued at $38,812.59, a Dreyfus Fund account of $29,561.96, a St. Louis Federal Savings & Loan passbook account of about $100, and a 1978 Ford automobile. Daughter, Sandra, also claims an interest in these assets. We chronicle the origin of their disagreement.

Appellant and his wife, Rose, married for fifty-three years, had two daughters: Sandra, who lives in St. Louis, and Barbara, in California. Sandra and her parents maintained frequent contact on a weekly basis. Prior to her death in October 1980, Rose, because of her declining health, suggested to appellant that Sandra assist them in financial matters. Sandra's name was then added to several certificates of deposit which appellant and his wife held jointly. During his lifetime appellant had managed all his family's financial affairs unassisted and had supported his wife, two daughters, and his mother-in-law as a pharmacist. His wife never worked outside the home. Although appellant alone handled the family's finances, Sandra's husband did appellant's tax returns for the past twenty years.

After his wife's death, appellant, then seventy-nine years old, agreed Sandra would manage his financial accounts and give him the interest income from them. Under this arrangement he initially received one hundred dollars per month. Finding the amount insufficient, appellant then received two hundred, and eventually three hundred, dollars per month from the accounts managed by Sandra.

In December 1981, appellant decided to remarry. He consulted Sandra about having an antenuptial agreement prepared since she had all the financial documents and papers concerning his investments and savings. He learned that, over the course of the year following his wife's death, Sandra had changed the names several times on certificates of deposits, and had added her social security number to some. He discovered that all his funds and accounts, including title to his car, were currently held by Sandra and him as joint tenants.

Sandra explained that appellant told her he wanted Sandra's daughter to have his car; however, she acknowledged that appellant had already given $4,000 to each of her two children to buy cars the year after her mother's death. She claimed one-half of the money in the funds she held with her father was hers because in the past twenty-five years she had given her mother approximately half...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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