In re the Estate of Van Orman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Van Orman

11 A.D.2d 1089, 206 N.Y.S.2d 998, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7445

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 27, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 1089 (In re the Estate of Van Orman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 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 Van Orman, 11 A.D.2d 1089, 206 N.Y.S.2d 998, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7445 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law and facts, without costs of this appeal to any party, and matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for the entry of a decree in accordance with the memorandum, adjudging that the amount in the joint bank account in question belongs to the estate. Memorandum: The finding by the Surrogate that Hattie Bergeman, respondent, is the owner and entitled to possession of the bank account in question, is contrary to, and against the weight of, the evidence. We find that said bank account was the sole property of the intestate at the time of his death and that the purported transfer thereof into a joint account of himself and the respondent was invalid and ineffective, because of his lack of mental capacity at the time of such alleged transfer. The order appealed from must be reversed and judgment awarded in favor of the administrators. (Appeal from order of Genesee Surrogate’s Court adjudging respondent to be owner of the bank account in question and dismissing the proceeding.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, Halpern, MeClusky and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed on the law and facts, without costs of this appeal to any party, and matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for the entry of a decree in accordance with the memorandum, adjudging that the amount in the joint bank account in question belongs to the estate. Memorandum: The finding by the Surrogate that Hattie Bergeman, respondent, is the owner and entitled to possession of the bank account in question, is contrary to, and against the weight of, the evidence. We find that said bank account was the sole property of the intestate at the time of his death and that the purported transfer thereof into a joint account of himself and the respondent was invalid and ineffective, because of his lack of mental capacity at the time of such alleged transfer. The order appealed from must be reversed and judgment awarded in favor of the administrators. (Appeal from order of Genesee Surrogate’s Court adjudging respondent to be owner of the bank account in question and dismissing the proceeding.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, Halpern, MeClusky and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 1089, 206 N.Y.S.2d 998, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-van-orman-nyappdiv-1960.