Williams v. Williams

Decision Date15 December 1959
Docket NumberNo. 49754,49754
Citation251 Iowa 260,100 N.W.2d 185
PartiesW. E. WILLIAMS and Frank Williams, Appellants, v. Walter WILLIAMS, The Estate of Myrtie Stephens, deceased, and the Council Bluffs Savings Bank, Council Bluffs, Iowa, executors of the estate of Myrtle Stephens, deceased, Appellees.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

Hess & Peters, Council Bluffs, for appellants.

Ross, Johnson, Northrop, Stuart & Tinley and Claude Morain, Council Bluffs, for appellees Estate of Myrtle Stephens, deceased, and Council Bluffs Sav. Bank, executors of the estate of Myrtle Stephens, deceased.

Don. H. Jackson, Council Bluffs, for appellee Walter Williams.

HAYS, Justice.

Myrtle Stephens died testate leaving her property to her brothers and a sister. The Council Bluffs Savings Bank is the executor of the estate. At the time of her death she had two accounts with said bank. A savings account in the amount of $5,184.06, and a checking account in the amount of $1,500. These accounts were in the name of Myrtle Stephens and Walter Williams, a brother. In this proceeding, brought by a brother, the question is whether these accounts constitute assets of the estate or belong to Walter Williams under a joint tenancy with right of survivorship agreement. The bank assumes a neutral position. The trial court held both accounts to be the property of Walter Williams.

There is a material difference in the two accounts even though they were opened at the same time and under identical circumstances. It is conceded that all the funds belonged to Mrs. Stephens.

I. The checking account: The bank records show that on August 24, 1956, Myrtle Stephens and Walter Williams signed a signature card at the place designated thereon 'authorized signatures of joint account holders'. Directly above the signatures are printed rules governing such accounts. Among other things, appears the following: 'The undersigned * * * agree that any funds deposited by us or any one else to the credit of said joint account, * * *, without regard to the original ownership of said funds, shall be payable to any one of the undersigned, or to the survivor thereof, whether any of the other said persons be living or not at the time of said payment. * * *. It is especially agreed that such payment to the survivor shall be binding upon each of us, and upon our heirs, next of kin, legatees, assigns and personal representatives'.

II. The savings account: It is headed 'Stephens, Myrtle or Williams, Walter (brother).' Thereafter in fine print is the following. 'I hereby agree to the bylaws, rules and regulations governing the Savings department of the Council Bluffs Savings Bank, Council Bluffs, Iowa.' It further provides that the agreement on the reverse side is a part of the instrument. The card bears the signatures of Myrtle Stephens and Walter Williams. Below the two signatures, stamped thereon in purple ink, is the date, August 24, 1956, and the notation 'joint tenancy with right or survivorship'. Nowhere else on the card is there any mention or reference to a joint tenancy with survivorship.

III. The record shows that on the date thereof, Myrtle Stephens and Walter Williams went to the bank and the accounts were opened. Walter Williams took no part in the transaction other than to sign his name to the two cards. They were in the bank about fifteen minutes. Mr. F. W. Radke, who handled the matter for the bank, was a witness. He states that neither card was read by either one of the signers but that the transaction was discussed. He further states: 'she said she wanted to open an account and wanted to have her brother on the account. She told me that she wanted him to be able to sign checks if she became sick or couldn't do anything he could go ahead and do business for her. It was on that basis that the account was opened and I told him with that 'or' in there he could come in the next day and draw all the money and there would be nothing to do. * * * I told them it was a joint account.' Also, 'I told her about the 'or' in the two accounts with her brother, that he had just as much right to this account as she does * * * and she said 'I have all the faith in the world in him. I don't care anything about that. That's perfectly all right with me. I want him to have charge of my money.''

If further appears from his testimony that after the savings account card was signed, and after the two parties had left the bank, he took the card to a teller and said 'this is a joint account between Myrtle Stephens and Walter Williams'. The teller then stamped thereon the date and the notation 'Joint tenancy with right of survivorship'. Later in the trial he appeared as a witness for the defendant, Walter Williams, and in response to a leading question, properly objected to, stated 'I told her she could go out and get killed going across the street before she got home and the money would belong to her brother' and she said 'I understand...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Gajewski v. Bratcher
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 27 Junio 1974
    ...burne, Inc., Del., 43 Del.Ch. 292, 224 A.2d 400 (1966); Waters v. Lanier, 116 Ga.App. 471, 157 S.E.2d 796 (1967); Williams v. Williams, 251 Iowa 260, 100 N.W.2d 185 (1959); O'Bryan v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc., 413 S.W.2d 891 (Ky.1966); Burrowes Corporation v. Read, 151 Me. 92, 116 A.2d 127 (19......
  • First Nat. Bank of Biwabik Minnesota v. Bank of Lemmon, s. 18816
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • 14 Febrero 1995
    ...of positive or substantive law founded upon the substantive rights of the parties. 30 Am.Jur.2d Evidence § 1017; Williams v. Williams, 251 Iowa 260, 100 N.W.2d 185 [(1959)]; City of Des Moines v. City of West Des Moines, supra [244 Iowa 310, 56 N.W.2d 904 (1953)]. Admission of testimony in ......
  • Kalouse's Estate, Matter of
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • 29 Agosto 1979
    ...disregarded even though not objected to when offered. . . . (citing authorities)." (Emphasis supplied.) See also Williams v. Williams, 251 Iowa 260, 264, 100 N.W.2d 185, 188. Therefore, their testimony is entitled to no consideration in arriving at our See also Annot., 81 A.L.R.3d 249, 264-......
  • R.B.S. v. K.M.S.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • 28 Mayo 2010
    ...Inc., Del., 43 Del.Ch. 292, 224 A.2d 400 (1966); Waters v. Lanier, 116 Ga.App. 471, 157 S.E.2d 796 (1967); Williams v. Williams, 251 Iowa 260, 100 N.W.2d 185 (1959); O'Bryan v. Massey–Ferguson, Inc., 413 S.W.2d 891 (Ky.1966); Burrowes Corporation v. Read, 151 Me. 92, 116 A.2d 127 (1955); Sh......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Joint Tenancies in Iowa Today
    • United States
    • Iowa Law Review No. 98-3, March 2013
    • 1 Marzo 2013
    ...afforded donee–depositor only kind treatment and affection); Burns v. Nemo, 105 N.W.2d 217, 223 (Iowa 1960). 180. Williams v. Williams, 100 N.W.2d 185 (Iowa 1959). 181. Id. at 187. 182. Id. 183. Id. 184. Id. 185. Id. 186. Id. at 188. 187. Id. 188. Id. 189. Trust of McManus v. McManus, 18 A.......

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