TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re the Accounting of Fenelon

In the Matter of the Accounting of John J. Fenelon, as Administrator of the Estate of Bessie Fenelon, Deceased, Respondent. Elizabeth Yauch, Appellant

In re the Accounting of Fenelon, 186 N.E. 201 (N.Y. 1933)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 23, 1933
Judges
Kellogg
Citations
186 N.E. 201262 N.Y. 571933 N.Y. LEXIS 913

Opinion of the Court — Kellogg

Kellogg, J.

The Banking Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 2), in section 249, provides that “ when a deposit shall be made by any person in the names of such depositor and another person and in form to be paid to either or the survivor of them ” such deposit “ shall become the property of such persons as joint tenants ” and “ may be paid to either during the life time of both or to the survivor after the death of one of them.” It further provides: “ The making of the deposit in such form shall, in the absence of fraud or undue influence, be conclusive evidence, in any action or proceeding to which either such savings bank or the sur *59 viving depositor is a party, of the intention of both depositors to vest title to such deposit and the additions thereto in such survivor.” This statute created presumptions not obtaining at the common law.

(Beaver v. Beaver, 117 N. Y. 421 ;

Matter of Bolin, 136 N. Y. 177 ;

Kelly v. Beers, 194 N. Y. 60 .) The Appellate Division of the third department has held that, in order that the statutory presumptions may take effect, the form of the deposit, as made, must have been sanctioned by the owner of the moneys directed to be deposited.

(Matter of Buchanan, 184 App. Div. 237 .) The case never came to this court. However, we approve of the conclusion reached. Obviously, if the law were otherwise, then the whim or error of the banker, in writing the form of the deposit, or a direction by one who had converted the moneys, might operate to transfer title of the true owner to the moneys, without volition on his part. The law does not countenance involuntary transfers of that character. In this case the question is whether or not the true owner directed the making of the deposit in the form in which it appears on the books of the bank where deposited, or acquiesced therein.

The moneys belonged to Bessie Fenelon, now deceased. With her friend, the claimant Elizabeth Yauch, she attended at the Albany Savings Bank, where she had moneys on deposit. She drew a draft or order upon the treasurer of the bank, calling for a transfer of her deposit to “ New account Bessie Fenelon and Mrs. Elizabeth Yauch.” The order contained no word directing the use of the statutory form in recording the deposit. The two women signed their names to a signature card. They also signed their names to a loose leaf which afterwards became a part of a book kept by the bank, which was termed its “ ledger.” After signing these two papers, the bank clerk with whom they dealt applied a rubber stamp to impress upon the two papers, above their signatures, the legend, printed in type so small as to be hardly legible, “ A joint *60 account with right of survivorship, payablé to either of the undersigned depositors, or the survivor, is hereby created and the bank notified accordingly.” No evidence was given to show that Bessie Fenelon ever was shown the printed legend or knew that the two papers had been stamped by the clerk to exhibit the same. After all this had been done, a bank pass book was handed to Bessie Fenelon. This bore the heading “ Bessie Fenelon and Mrs. Elizabeth Yauch,” and showed the deposit that day made. It exhibited no words, stamped or written, to indicate that the account was a joint account payable to either or the survivor. Neither the Surrogate nor the Appellate Division was able to draw the conclusion from these facts that Bessie Fenelon directed that the moneys be deposited in a joint account, or acquiesced in the use of the stamp, which made the account appear to be an account jointly held by the two women. We are unable to reach the conclusion, as a matter of law, that Bessie Fenelon directed or authorized the deposit to be made to joint account. We must, therefore, affirm the decision that the moneys belonged to the estate of Bessie Fenelon, and not to Elizabeth Yauch, the survivor of the two women.

The order should be affirmed with costs to the respondent payable out of the estate. (See 262 N. Y. 308, 539 .)

Pound, Ch. J., Lehman and O’Brien, JJ., concur; Crane and Crouch, JJ., dissent; Hubbs, J., not sitting.

Order affirmed, etc.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 24 cases

View all citing references →
1933: 41934: 11937: 11938: 11944: 11946: 11947: 11956: 11957: 11959: 11961: 21962: 21965: 11966: 11967: 11968: 11970: 11974: 11981: 119332026peak 1933 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re the Estate of McCarthy164 Misc. 719 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1937)
  2. In re the Accounting of Rowland135 N.E.2d 193 (N.Y. 1956)
  3. DeLorenzo v. Federal Deposit Insurance268 F. Supp. 378 (S.D.N.Y. 1967)
  4. In re the Estate of Olin19 Misc. 2d 55 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1959)
  5. In re the Estate of Rider31 Misc. 2d 542 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1961)
  6. In re the Accounting of Fenelon186 N.E. 794 (N.Y. 1933)

Most recent

  1. In re Byrnes85 A.D.2d 601 (1981)
  2. In re the Estate of Thomas43 A.D.2d 446 (1974)
  3. Roth v. Panessa62 Misc. 2d 896 (1970)
  4. Lo Gerfo v. Lo Gerfo31 A.D.2d 655 (1968)
  5. DeLorenzo v. Federal Deposit Insurance268 F. Supp. 378 (S.D.N.Y. 1967)
  6. In re the Estate of De Fonce26 A.D.2d 819 (1966)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
Beaver v. Beaver, 22 N.E. 940 (N.Y. 1889) 279
In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Bolin, 32 N.E. 626 (N.Y. 1892) 117
In re the Accounting of Fenelon, 186 N.E. 794 (N.Y. 1933) 30
In re of Appraisal of the Estate of Buchanan, 184 A.D. 237 (1918) 18
Kelly v. Beers, 86 N.E. 985 (N.Y. 1909) 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list