Schneider's Estate, In re

• Decision Date: 19 May 1954
• Docket Number: Gen. No. 46143
• Citation: 120 N.E.2d 353,2 Ill.App.2d 560
• Parties: In re SCHNEIDER'S ESTATE. LINK v. RALSTON.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 353

120 N.E.2d 353

2 Ill.App.2d 560

In re SCHNEIDER'S ESTATE.

LINK v. RALSTON.

Gen. No. 46143.

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Third Division.

May 19, 1954.

A. Charles Ford, Chicago, Charles D. Snewind, Chicago, of counsel, for appellant.

Frank J. Link, Chicago, in pro. per.

LEWE, Justice.

Frank J. Link, executor of the estate of Edward Schneider, deceased, filed a petition in the Probate Court of Cook County alleging in substance that William M. Ralston is in possession of funds on deposit in the name of the deceased and Ralston in the North-West Federal Savings and Loan Association of Chicago, hereinafter called the 'Association,' and that Ralston has no valid claim to these funds. Pursuant to the prayer of the petition a citation was issued and upon a full hearing it was dismissed and the respondent Ralston was discharged. From that order the executor appealed to the Superior Court where after a trial de novo the court found that the funds in the Association were the property of the deceased and ordered Ralston to pay the funds to the executor. Ralston appeals.

May 10, 1952 Ralston and Schneider executed two identical agreements at the Association involving two savings accounts aggregating $5,850.81, which read:

'Joint Savings Account. One signature only required for withdrawal. Account No. 17434, Schneider, Edward (Mr.) or Ralston, William M. (Mr.)

                'Type all names:  ........ (Last Name) ........ (First Name) ........ (Middle Name)
                

'As joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common, the undersigned hereby apply for a membership and for a * * * savings account in the North-West Federal Savings & Loan Association and for issuance of evidence of membership in the joint names of the undersigned as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common. The signatures of the undersigned are shown below, and the Association is hereby 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 the membership and any savings account in said Association held by the undersigned, whether the other person or persons named hereon be living or not. Payment or delivery of a receipt or acquittance signed by any one of the undersigned shall be a valid and sufficient release and discharge of said Association. The undersigned hereby authorizes the said Association to accept drafts, checks, money orders and other credit instruments for credit of this account, whether payable to either one or all of the undersigned, and if not endorsed to supply such endorsement as may be required.

'(1) /s/ Edward Schneider

'550 N. Mason Ave.

'Chicago 30

'(2) /s/ Wm. M. Ralston

'2456 Normandy

'Chicago 35'

An identical agreement was executed for Account No. 17435. Printed forms of the agreements were furnished by the Association.

The history of the transaction may be briefly stated. In response to a telephone call on May 10, 1952 from Schneider, Ralston went to Schneider's home and soon after one Emil Kohut, an old acquaintance, also came to the Schneider home. Schneider told Ralston that he was 'generally upset' and that he wanted Ralston's name on the savings accounts at the Association 'so that in case I am sick you can go and get the money for me.' Ralston suggested to Schneider that he place Kohut's name on one of the accounts, or put somebody else, if he could, in his (Ralston's) place. Kohut refused to 'become one of the joint signatures' on Schneider's accounts. According to Kohut's testimony, three or four weeks prior to May 10, 1952 Schneider, while visiting at the Kohut's home stated to Kohut 'By golly, if I ever get sick I don't know how I will ever get my money out of the bank. I want somebody else on my bank account.'

Ralston, who was called by the executor as an adverse witness, admitted that all of the money in the two accounts here in controversy was the sole and exclusive property of Schneider and that he never deposited any money in these accounts.

According to the allegations in the petition, shortly before the death of Schneider all of his property was bequeathed to his brother. No answer was filed to the petition in the Probate or the Superior court by Ralston or the Association. Objections were made to the testimony of Ralston and Kohut by the respondent. Rulings on the objections were reserved and later the testimony of these witnesses was received in evidence.

Respondent Ralston's contention is that the instruments in writing signed by the parties and accepted by the bank created a joint tenancy with the right of survivorship by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 76, Paragraph 2, sub-paragraphs a, b and c, Illinois Revised Statutes, and that the testimony of Ralston, an adverse witness, and Kohut should not have been received in evidence.

In Cuilini v. Northern Trust Company, 1948, 335 Ill.App. 86, 80 N.E.2d 275, involving the survivor's right to funds in joint accounts, the basic question presented was whether, in the absence of fraud, duress or mistake, parol evidence is competent to alter or modify the deposit contracts. We held that, where there is no ambiguity in the terms used, the instrument itself is the only criterion of the intentions of the parties and that the parol evidence upon which the plaintiff relied was inadmissible to modify the terms of the written agreement between the parties and the bank. In deciding Cuilini v. Northern Trust Company we considered Matthew v. Moncrief, 1943, 77 U.S.App.D.C. 221, 135 F.2d 695 as the best reasoned and most analogous. From a reaching of that case it appears that after a careful search and analysis of cases in many jurisdictions, including Illinois, the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, speaking through the late Justice Vinson...