- 22 -
Undoubtedly, the foregoing evidence and like documentation
might be highly probative were the aim to establish existence of
a joint account. That point, however, is undisputed. The
instant inquiry is already taking place under the rubric of TPC
438(a). Because that provision operates solely in the context of
joint accounts, documentation showing accounts titled in the
names of multiple parties and conferring on them contractual
rights vis-a-vis a financial institution is presumed and inherent
in all cases. Accordingly, the clear and convincing evidence
referenced in the exception must demand something more. The
estate’s reliance on materials of this nature is therefore
misplaced and carries little, if any, weight in establishing
decedent’s intent to make a gift. In fact, the exclusive use of
decedent’s personal information in filling out the customer
agreement could cut the other way.
The second general category of circumstances pressed by the
estate relates to Mr. Greene’s claimed management of and control
over the Valdes & Moreno account. The estate mentions that Mr.
Greene conducted “due diligence” with respect to the eConnect
shares, attended eConnect shareholder meetings, consulted and
jointly made decisions with decedent regarding the account,
recommended when to sell the eConnect stock, shared in the
excitement of the rising price and sale, opened mail related to
the account, was the subject of purported comments by decedent
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011