Winsmore's Estate

190 A. 892, 325 Pa. 303, 1937 Pa. LEXIS 365
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 11, 1937·No. Appeal, 31·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The sole question to be determined op this appeal is whether the ownership of an account with a brokerage firm was in decedent or her son. The court below found from sufficient evidence that this account, nominally in decedent’s name on its books, was in fact the account of her son, and that it was opened with that understanding and treated by the firm as his account. It concluded that the debit balance was the personal obligation of her son. These findings are supported by evidence and must be accepted as binding on this appeal: Seidel’s Estate, 322 Pa. 142, 143; Pusey’s Estate, 321 Pa. 248, 260, 261. As this was a claim against a decedent’s estate, the burden rested on appellant to clearly establish it: Donlevy’s Estate, 323 Pa. 173, 176.

Decree affirmed at appellant’s cost.

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

Winsmore's Estate, 190 A. 892, 325 Pa. 303, 1937 Pa. LEXIS 365 (Pa. 1937).

190 A. 892 (Winsmore's Estate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Pew Memorial Trust No. 1
5 Pa. D. & C.3d 627 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1977)
Cameron Estate
130 A.2d 173 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)