- 20 -
claiming that a gift has been made.4 Oadra v. Stegall, supra at
891. Extrinsic or parol evidence is typically inadmissable to
prove the nature of an account for purposes of the Texas Probate
Code but is not proscribed on questions of the ownership and
capacities of parties to such an account. Stegall v. Oadra,
supra at 294; Oadra v. Stegall, supra at 894.
Texas courts adhere to a requirement of three elements as
necessary to establish the existence of a gift: (1) Intent to
make a gift; (2) delivery of the property; and (3) acceptance of
the property. Dorman v. Arnold, 932 S.W.2d 225, 227 (Tex. App.
1996); Grimsley v. Grimsley, 632 S.W.2d 174, 177 (Tex. App.
1982). Given that these requirements are stated in the
conjunctive and that the emphasis of TPC 438(a) is on the issue
of intent, focus at the outset on the first-listed element is
appropriate here.
The estate cites a litany of circumstances in an effort to
show that decedent intended by placing her eConnect stock in the
joint account to make a gift to Mr. Greene.5 This alleged
4 The State law rules on placement of burden relevant in
this case dovetail with the typical rule in tax litigation that
the burden of proof rests on the taxpayer generally and on the
party raising any new matter particularly. See Rule 142(a).
Although sec. 7491(a) can effect a shift of burden in specified
circumstances, the estate makes no argument that the statute has
any application here and has not addressed the preconditions for
its use.
5 The estate also directs the Court’s attention to a number
(continued...)
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011