In re Estate of Williams

138 N.E.2d 189, 73 Ohio Law. Abs. 441, 1956 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 332
CourtPutnam County Probate Court
DecidedJune 19, 1956
DocketNo. 17261
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 138 N.E.2d 189 (In re Estate of Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Putnam County Probate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Estate of Williams, 138 N.E.2d 189, 73 Ohio Law. Abs. 441, 1956 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 332 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1956).

Opinion

OPINION

By WARREN, J:

John D. Williams died testate on Feb. 14, 1955, leaving surviving him his widow, Bess I. Williams, his sole and only devisee, legatee, and heir at law. Decedent’s will was admitted to probate and letters testamentary were issued to Bess I. Williams by this court on March 1, 1955. Previous to filing an inventory, the widow as an individual prepared an application requesting the tax commission to consent to transfer certain joint and survivorship funds from the joint names of herself and husband to herself individually which was approved on March 1, 1955. One, the checking account in the amount of $369.64 remained in the name of Bess I. Williams and the second, a certificate of deposit for $9,865.12 was issued to Bess I. Williams and the funds therefrom were not deposited into any account as executrix.

On May 17, 1955, said executrix filed an inventory and appraisement in said estate. The inventory, in Schedule E, describes a certain parcel of real estate which was appraised at $13,500.00. This real estate is not part of the estate, having been transferred to his spouse by decedent during his lifetime. It was included in the inventory in order to secure an appraisement of the same. The widow concedes that the real estate was deeded in contemplation of death and is subject to payment of inheritance taxes. The only other assets listed are contained in Schedule C and total $11,294.41. Two of these items amounting to $10,234.76 are the joint and survivorship accounts, one for $369.64 and the [443]*443other for $9,865.12, and the following notation is contained in Schedule C as to these two accounts: “In joint names of Bess I. Williams and decedent but survivor waives right to joint account as this was property of decedent.” The remaining items are cash items, the property of decedent, amounting to $1,059.65. The recapitulation in the inventory contains total assets of $11,294.41 and the sum of $2,258.88 is set off to the widow under Schedule F, and a $3,000.00 year’s allowance is provided for the widow. The joint and survivorship accounts were used in computing the amount of exempted property. The executrix, attorneys and surviving spouse all waived notice and no further notice of the filing of the inventory was given. Said inventory was approved on the day it was filed.

In her application to determine inheritance tax the executrix included the two items of joint and survivorship property amounting to $10,234.76 among the assets of the estate making the total assets $11,294.41. The real estate valued at $13,500.00 was listed as deeded in contemplation of death. The debts listed amount to $6,874.40 including $2,258.88 for her exemption under §2115.13 R. C., and $3,000.00 for her year’s allowance. The court determined the tax on the foregoing petition and the Department of Taxation filed exceptions. The case was heard on an agreed statement of facts.

Without the joint and survivorship property the estate is insolvent, the total personal property being $1,059.65, and the total debts, excluding widow’s exemption and year’s allowance, but including costs of administration and all other debts, being $1,615.52. Both of the joint and survivorship accounts were not required to pay the debts. The excess amount goes back to the widow as she is the sole legatee, devisee and heir at law. Can the amount of the debts and allowances exceeding the assets of the estate be deducted from the joint and survivorship accounts in determining inheritance tax?

Joint and survivorship deposits are recognized in Ohio on a contractual basis, and such deposits do not constitute any part of decedent’s estate. Upon the death of decedent the surviving widow had exclusive title and ownership of the joint and survivorship deposits. See Tax Commission v. Hutchison, 120 Oh St 361; Cleveland Trust Co. v. Scobie, 114 Oh St 241; Schwaigert v. Vitzhum, 26 Abs 442; Oleff, Adm. v. Hodapp, Gdn., 129 Oh St 433; Osterland, Adm., v. Schroeder, 22 Oh Ap 213. In the instant case the widow exercised this right of ownership before the inventory was filed, by having the funds released by the tax commission to herself individually.

In Serge v. Flueck, 132 Oh St 377, syllabus one states:

“Where a joint bank account is, by the creator thereof, made ‘payable to either or the survivor,’ the right of survivorship vests in the joint depositors by virtue of contract.”

And syllabus three reads:

“Upon the death of the creator of a joint and survivorship bank account the surviving joint depositors have a right to the balance remaining in the account to the exclusion of the personal representative of such decedent.”

[444]*444In the estate of Hatch, 154 Oh St 149, at page 152, the Court says:

“Obviously, the creation of a joint and survivorship bank account is a matter of intention to be ascertained from the conduct and actions of the persons concerned. Beginning with the case of Cleveland Trust Co. v. Scobie, Admr., 114 Oh St 241, 151 N. E. 373, 48 A. L. R. 182, this court has adopted the view that persons may contract for the joint ownership of a bank account with the right of survivorship, and, when such a contract has been entered into, the joint owner who survives succeeds to the title to the whole of the proceeds of the account by virtue of the contract.” * * *

Sole title and ownership of the proceeds of the joint and survivorship accounts, therefore, went to the widow upon the death of decedent and formed no part of the assets of the estate. However, for the purpose of determining inheritance tax, other property than property which decedent owned at time of death is included.

Sec. 5731.02 II. C., provides in part, as follows:

“Sec. 5731.02 R. C. A tax is hereby levied upon the succession to any property passing, in trust or otherwise, for the use of a person, institution, or corporation, in the following cases:” * * *
“(E) Whenever property is held by two or more persons jointly, so that upon the death of one of them the survivor has a right to the immediate ownership or possession and enjoyment of the whole property, the accrual of such right by the death of one of them shall be deemed a succession taxable under this section, in the same manner as if the enhanced value of the whole property belonged absolutely to the deceased person, and he had bequeathed the same to the survivor by will;” In the instant case, the widow, upon the death of decedent, had an immediate right of ownership, and possession and enjoyment of the entire proceeds of the joint and survivorship accounts and did exercise this right and become the sole owner of the same, but, because of her succession to said property, said survivorship accounts were subject to Ohio inheritance tax.

Sec. 5731.17 R. C., provides in part, as follows:

“Taxes levied by §§5731.01 to 5731.56 inclusive, R. C., shall be due and payable at the time of the succession, except as provided in such sections, but not prior to the death of decedent.” * * *

In Estate of Kirkham, 34 Abs 405, syllabus two provides:

“The enhanced value of a joint and survivorship bank account is that portion of the account which by reason of the death of one of the joint survivors has accrued to the surviving owner or owners in excess of the contribution made by the survivor or the survivors to the account at the time of its creation.”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Krakoff v. United States
313 F. Supp. 1089 (S.D. Ohio, 1970)
Cantor v. Department of Taxation
210 N.E.2d 285 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1964)
In re Estate of Cantor
200 N.E.2d 515 (Montgomery County Probate Court, 1963)
In re Estate of Bauer
191 N.E.2d 859 (Fulton County Probate Court, 1962)
Shipman v. Hance
165 N.E.2d 678 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 N.E.2d 189, 73 Ohio Law. Abs. 441, 1956 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-williams-ohprobctputnam-1956.