In re the Estate of Guggino

160 Misc. 768, 291 N.Y.S. 688, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1525
CourtNew York Surrogate's Court
DecidedOctober 5, 1936
StatusPublished

This text of 160 Misc. 768 (In re the Estate of Guggino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re the Estate of Guggino, 160 Misc. 768, 291 N.Y.S. 688, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1525 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1936).

Opinion

Feely, S.

The objectants seek to surcharge the executor with the amount of certain deposits claimed by him individually to belong in joint survivorship accounts standing in his name and that of this testator, who was his uncle. One account, that had first stood in the name of the testator alone in a branch of the Lincoln Alliance Bank and Trust Company, was made joint as aforesaid on the third day before testator’s death, which occurred just before midnight of December 27, 1934, and the other account was a new one that was opened with the Union Trust Company by the agreement on the signature cards, hereinafter set forth, which were signed twice by the testator and his nephew, on the day before testator’s death, and immediately delivered to the officer of the trust company, in whose presence they had been signed and who joined in the agreement on behalf of the trust company by signing his name thereto also. There is no suggestion that any of these transfers or agreements were made or intended merely for the convenience of the testator, or with any other intention than to create at once the relation of joint ownership of these funds, with the right of survivorship, and without any reservation other than that which is essential to such holding of a fund or deposit.

The old account in the Lincoln in testator’s name alone carried a credit balance of $239.66 on the day it was agreed to be thereafter held jointly as aforesaid. This balance clearly passed to the [770]*770survivor by virtue of that agreement. At the same time this old account in the Lincoln was agreed to be held jointly, two checks were signed by testator on his two savings accounts in Niagara Falls, with the intention of adding them to this local account —■ one check for $616.49 on the Power City Trust Company, and the other for $2,612.94 on the Niagara County Savings Bank. The proceeds of the first check, on the Power City Trust Company, for $616.49, remitted on December twenty-fourth, arrived here after the holiday, on December twenty-seventh; and on that day, in the due course of banking business, were entered on the bank ledger here of this joint account. This sum also clearly passed to the survivor, by virtue of the agreement of deposit, because it was not until midnight of that day that testator died. The attending physician said he found testator rational in the forenoon of that day; but that at his second visit, about six p. m., he found the patient in great pain, and at this time not in condition to do any business. However, the acceptance by the Power City Trust Company of this check on the preceding day, if not sooner, passed title, without regard to the time when the proceeds arrived in this city.

The Niagara County Savings Bank acknowledged the receipt by it of the check for $2,612.94 and the pass book by its letter which was received here by the Lincoln Alliance Bank and Trust Company on December twenty-seventh. The savings bank having thus accepted this check during the business hours of the twenty-seventh, before the maker’s death, title to this money then passed to the payees subject to their agreement for joint survivorship holding of the same. The fact that the proceeds of this check on the savings bank for $2,612.94 did not actually arrive here until December thirty-first, four days after Guggino’s death, is immaterial; but as the local bank officials had learned of testator’s death, this remittance was held up here; and it was finally, on advice of the bank’s counsel, credited to the personal account of the survivor, with a notation that it was not to be withdrawn until after the judicial settlement. By virtue of the contract these men had entered into, as between themselves and jointly with the bank, this fund also passed to the survivor at the death of his codepositor, regardless of the belated arrival here of the remittance.

The remaining question arises out of the opening of the new joint survivorship account in the Union Trust Company. On the day before testator’s death he informed the manager of a branch of the Union Trust Company, Mr. F. J. Cappellino, that he had a savings deposit of lire in the Banca Commerciale Italiana, in Rome, Italy, which he wished to withdraw and place in joint [771]*771survivorship account here in the name of himself and his nephew, the executor, who had been kind to him in his illness. Testator had come here in April, to the home of the nephew, suffering from cancer of the stomach; and he lived therein until he died in December following. At the time of the interview with the manager, testator had been quite ill, and had been taking a narcotic under the advice of his physician; but the latter testified the patient was competent and knew what he was doing at that time. The manager’s testimony is to the same effect.

In the interview with the bank manager, the testator inquired what would be done in case testator died before the money arrived here from Italy. The bank manager said to him this would be taken care of by the survivorship feature of the account. Testator then called in his nephew and asked him if that arrangement was satisfactory, and on being assured it was, testator and the nephew each then signed in duplicate the contract evidenced by the signature cards used by this trust company for such accounts, which the bank manager thereupon signed also. These cards, set out in full below, carried the provisions necessary to carry out the intention of the parties to hold these funds jointly with right of survivorship; and the manager, in testator’s native tongue, explained the agreement to testator, and assured him that if he died the nephew would get this account. At the same time testator signed a power of attorney to this trust company to procure this money from the Italian bank to the credit of the attorney in fact for the credit of the joint survivorship account. Testator also signed what we would call a check ” to close out the account, but in the Italian form it is named an “ assignment ” of the account to the attorney in fact for the purpose of “ extinguishing ” the account the parties purposed to transfer from Italy to this country. The pass book, necessary to be presented in order to withdraw these lire, was also delivered by testator to the bank manager. The manager then gave the testator, at the latter’s request, a receipt for the papers so signed; and proceeded at once to mail the pass book, check or assignment,” and the power of attorney, to Italy; but on the following day, while these papers were en route in the mail, testator died. In due course the proceeds of these 86,000 lire were remitted to the Union Trust Company, which is still holding the same.

With respect to this belated remittance from Italy, the objectants claim the estate is the owner, on the ground that the intervening death cut off the power of attorney and the order to pay embodied in the check or assignment.” The executor individually claims these moneys belong to him as the survivor in the joint account [772]*772agreement, under which those moneys were fetched here, notwithstanding they arrived here after the testator had died.

The completed three-party contract, represented by the cards signed in duplicate and delivered as above mentioned, is so important in this matter that it is now set out in full, as follows:

“ Rochester, N. Y. December 26, 1934
“ We, Charles Gugino and Joseph LoPalo do hereby open a deposit account with the Union Trust Company cf Rochester in the following name and form:

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

Related

In Re the Estate of Suter
179 N.E. 310 (New York Court of Appeals, 1932)
Claim of Strail v. Estate of Suter
232 A.D. 45 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1931)
In re the Estate of Sutter
138 Misc. 85 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1930)
Commonwealth v. Circo
199 N.E. 896 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1936)
Deal's Adm'r v. Merchants & Mechanics Savings Bank
91 S.E. 135 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 Misc. 768, 291 N.Y.S. 688, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-guggino-nysurct-1936.