Oliver v. Givens
| Decision Date | 04 March 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 5547,5547 |
| Citation | 204 Va. 123,129 S.E.2d 661 |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | BETTY H. OLIVER v. CHARLES W. GIVENS, JR., TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY FOR WILLIS LEE OLIVER, BANKRUPT. Record |
George D. Bowles, for the plaintiff in error.
Linwood E. Toombs, for the defendant in error.
Charles W. Givens, Jr., trustee in bankruptcy for Willis Lee Oliver, bankrupt, filed an amended motion for judgment against Betty H. Oliver, the wife of Willis Lee Oliver, seeking to recover one-half of the net proceeds of the sale of certain real estate which the Olivers had owned as tenants by the entireties. It was alleged that the sale of the property was within twelve months of the date of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy; that the entire proceeds had been paid to the wife; and that the payment to her of the husband's one-half interest therein was a fraud on his creditors and should be set aside and the husband's share paid to the trustee.
In her pleadings the defendant wife took the position that the real estate owned by her and her husband as tenants by the entireties was a valid estate, free of her husband's debts; that the proceeds of the sale of the property were of the same character, and that, therefore, the trustee in bankruptcy had no interest therein.
In a written opinion the lower court held that the tenancy by the entirety of the husband and wife in the real estate was terminated by the sale and conveyance of the property; that they became 'tenants in common' in the net proceeds of the sale, each owning one-half thereof; that the husband's share was subject to his debts; and that, if the allegations in the motion for judgment be true, the trustee in bankruptcy was entitled to a judgment against the wife for the amount of the husband's share which had come into her hands. After this preliminary contention of the defendant wife had thus been disposed of, there was a trial by a jury which resulted in a judgment in favor of the trustee against the wife for the sum of $4,122.44, one-half of the net proceeds, and from that judgment the defendant wife has appealed.
The only assignments of error which we need consider challenge the correctness of the lower court's rulings that, (1) the net proceeds of the sale of the real estate were owned by the husband and wife as tenants in common, with the result that the husband's one-half interest therein was subject to his debts and became an asset to which the trustee in bankruptcy was entitled; and (2) the receipt by the wife of the entire net proceeds of the sale constituted a fraudulent conveyance by the husband to her of his interest in such proceeds.
On appeal the appellant wife contends, as she did in the lower court, that the proceeds of the sale of the real estate were owned by her and her husband as tenants by the entireties, that the husband's interest therein was exempt from the claims of his creditors, and that the transfer of his interest therein to her was not in fraud of their rights.
The relevant facts are not in dispute. On October 14, 1954, Willis Lee Oliver and Betty H. Oliver, his wife, purchased certain real estate in Laurel Glen, Henrico county, Virginia, the title to which was conveyed to the husband and wife 'as tenants by the entireties with the right of survivorship as at common law.' Subsequently they erected a home on the property.
In 1956 Oliver formed a partnership with his brother and conducted an electrical contracting business until May 17, 1960, when they filed voluntary petitions in bankruptcy and were adjudicated bankrupts. Charles W. Givens, Jr., was duly appointed trustee in bankruptcy for Willis Lee Oliver.
On February 23, 1959, the Olivers contracted to sell the Laurel Glen property to P. E. Spear and wife for the sum of $19,000. This sale was consummated by a deed dated May 29 and recorded on July 1, 1959. Settlement of this transaction was made by the realtor who had negotiated the sale. He testified that the purchasers assumed a mortgage on the property, leaving the sellers, the Olivers, entitled to $10,614.15 in cash. However, simultaneously with the closing of this transaction, the Olivers applied $2,369.47 out of the cash proceeds to the purchase, through the same realtor, of other property, resulting in a net balance of $8,244.68 due to the Olivers. On July 2, 1959, the realtor gave to 'Bettie' H. Oliver a check for this latter amount which she deposited to her credit in a local bank.
On the same day, July 2, 'Bettie' H. Oliver drew a check on this account for $3,000, payable to 'Mrs. J. E. Mitchell,' in payment of the purchase price of three acres of land in Hanover county. This transaction was consummated in November, 1959, by a deed from Clara Mae Mitchell and others to 'Bettie' H. Oliver.
However, we are not here concerned with whether the trustee in bankruptcy may subject this latter property to the claims of the creditors of Willis Lee Oliver. Our only concern is whether the trustee is entitled to a personal judgment against Betty H. Oliver for what he contends is the husband's share of the net proceeds of the sale of the Laurel Glen property which came into her hands. The determination of this issue turns upon whether the proceeds of the sale of the Laurel Glen property, which the husband and wife owned as tenants by the entireties, were owned by them as tenants in common or as tenants by the entireties. If, as the lower court held, such proceeds were owned by them as tenants in common, then the husband's share therein was subject to the claims of his creditors and the transfer by him to the wife of that share of the proceeds is subject to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Phillips
...the early common law, a tenancy by the entirety protected only real property. See 2 American Law of Property, supra , § 6.6, at 30. In Oliver v. Givens , as a matter of first impression, we held that "personal property as well as realty may be held by a husband and wife as tenants by the en......
-
In re Mckain
...a general rule may be held as a tenancy by the entirety under Virginia law. See Va.Code Ann. § 55–20.2(A); see also Oliver v. Givens, 204 Va. 123, 129 S.E.2d 661, 663 (1963) (estate by the entirety can exist in personal property). On the other hand, however, the Virginia General Assembly ha......
-
In re Thomas
...have reached the properties in any event. In this event, the discharges should be granted. Id. at 945. See Oliver v. Givens, 204 Va. 123, 127, 129 S.E.2d 661, 663-64 (1963). It is tempting to read into the Roberts opinion that the resolution of the fraudulent conveyance question turned on w......
-
In re Laines
...be avoided at state law because the property was exempt as tenants by the entirety property before the transfer. Oliver v. Givens, 204 Va. 123, 129 S.E.2d 661 (1963); Vasilion v. Vasilion, 192 Va. 735, 743, 66 S.E.2d 599, 604 (1951). That restriction does not apply to Bankruptcy Code § 548(......