Webster v. St. Petersburg Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n

• Decision Date: 12 January 1945
• Citation: 20 So.2d 400,155 Fla. 412
• Parties: WEBSTER et al. v. ST. PETERSBURG FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N. SAME v. FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

20 So.2d 400

155 Fla. 412

WEBSTER et al. v. ST. PETERSBURG FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N.

SAME v. FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N.

Florida Supreme Court

January 12, 1945

Rehearing Denied Feb. 1, 1945.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pinellas County; T. Frank Hobson, judge.

Austin L Richardson, of St. Petersburg, for appellants.

Miller & Peterson and B. M. Skelton, all of St. Petersburg, for appellees.

SEBRING, Justice.

This suit is brought to determine the title to the proceeds of certain savings bank accounts created by Frank B. Webster, deceased during his lifetime. The real controversy is between the personal representatives of Webster's estate and certain parties to this suit who claim the deposits as surviving joint depositors.

Three of the savings accounts in question were with First Federal Savings and Loan Association of St. Petersburg. On January 3, 1938, Webster created the first of these accounts by depositing with the savings and loan association the sum of $1000 and requesting that an account be opened in the name 'Frank B. Webster or in case of death Winniefred Manley.' Apparently no signature card or written deposit agreement in the form customarily required was ever executed with the savings bank either by Frank B. Webster or Winniefred Manley in connection with this account--at least no such card of agreement is before us on the record. The manner in which the other two accounts with First Federal Savings and Loan Association of St. Petersburg were created needs a word. In September 1938 Webster, by letter, made known to the bank his desire to open additional accounts. In response to the letter the bank mailed Webster several membership application cards of two different types; one type for the creation of individual accounts, the other for the creation of joint accounts. Printed on the cards is the explanation that if the creation of a 'joint-holder with right of survivorship' account is contemplated both 'joint depositors' should sign a joint account card while if an individual account is desired the individual account card should be signed by the sole owner of the deposit. In due course Webster mailed to the bank two individual-account cards signed by him alone, one joint-account card bearing only the name 'Lena Blanch Post' and one joint-account card bearing only the name 'Fred Defendorf'. Enclosed with the cards was a check from Webster for $2000.00 with the request that two accounts of $1000.00 each be opened in the designation 'Frank B. Webster or Lena Blanch Post' and 'Frank B. Webster or Fred Defendorf.' The bank accepted the signature cards as the bases for the establishment of two separate joint-accounts and issued its investment share certificates to Webster in the names 'Frank B. Webster or Lena Blanch Post' and 'Frank B. Webster or Fred Defendorf.'

The remaining three savings accounts involved in this suit were with St. Petersburg Federal Savings and Loan Association. On February 16, 1939, Webster created in this savings bank an investment share account in the sum of $500. At his direction the bank issued the investment share certificate in the name 'Frank B. Webster or Webster Defendorf.' On April 6, 1939, Webster purchased a second $1000 investment share certificate from the savings bank, and at his request the certificate was issued with the ownership designation 'Frank B. Webster, in case of death Alice A. King.' No signature card or depository agreement was ever signed by any of the parties in connection with either of these transactions. On February 26, 1940, Webster purchased a $500 investment share certificate from the bank directing that it be made payable 'Frank B. Webster in case of death pay to Gladys Thompson.' Webster signed a signature card in connection with this transaction in the same language as was used in the certificate to designate ownership. All investment share certificates issued by the savings banks to Webster are similar in language. For example, on the face of the certificate issued in the name of Webster and Post appears the name of the issuing bank, the certificate number, the amount of the account, and the words 'This certifies that Frank B. Webster or Lena Blanch Post is a member of the undersigned and holds a One Thousand Dollars investment share account of the undersigned. * * *' None of the certificates involved contains wording indicating that the persons named therein are to hold 'as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common,' or language of similar import frequently used by banks in the attempted creation of a 'joint-ownership with right of survivorship' account.

At Webster's death the personal representatives of his estate tendered the certificates to the banks involved and made demand for payment of the funds. The persons named in the various certificates likewise laid claim to the funds. The banks, being in doubt as to whom payment should be made, filed bills of interpleader and were allowed to bring the funds into court to await judicial determination of ownership. By order of court the interpleader suits were consolidated and heard together. Testimony was taken on the issue of ownership of the funds. At the conclusion of the trial the chancellor entered a final decree in favor of each of the individual claimants, finding them entitled to the funds. In the final decree the chancellor found that 'each certificate, not standing alone but coupled with the evidence of intent and its disclosure of the attending circumstances, establishes an enforceable contract or a valid trust.' The chancellor also found that 'regardless of whether these transactions can be termed gifts inter vivos, the least that can be said, in light of the evidence and the definite, clean-cut intention which the Court gleans from it and from all the surrounding circumstances, is that these transactions should be upheld in this Court of Conscience whether upon the theory of a trust in each instance or of a contract or simply upon general equitable principles. It is therefore concluded that the several parties named in the certificates should prevail.'

The personal representatives of the Estate of Webster have appealed from the final decree.

In order for any of the surviving claimants to be entitled to the bank deposits as against the personal representatives of Webster's estate the evidence must show either (a) that a joint tenancy with right of survivorship was created in the deposit between Webster and such claimant; (b) that Webster made a gift of the deposit to the claimant; (c) that Webster created a trust in the deposit for the use and benefit of the claimant; or (d) that Webster's...