Estate of Sylvia Gore, Donor, Deceased, Pamela Powell, Personal Representative - Page 48




                                       - 48 -                                         
          GFLP and not on whether there was consideration for the alleged             
          transfer to GFLP.                                                           
               The requirements for a valid inter vivos gift under Oklahoma           
          law are:  (1) Donative intent; (2) actual delivery of the subject           
          matter of the gift; (3) the relinquishment by the donor of all              
          ownership, dominion, and control over the subject matter of the             
          gift; and (4) acceptance of the gift by the donee.  Estate of               
          Davenport v. Commissioner, supra at 1183, 1186; Stinchcomb v.               
          Stinchcomb, 674 P.2d 26, 30 (Okla. 1983); Frazier v. Okla. Gas &            
          Elec. Co., 63 P.2d 11, 13 (Okla. 1936).  The transfer by gift               
          must be “gratuitous and irrevocable and go into immediate and               
          absolute effect”.  Fox v. Kramer (In re Estate of Estes), 983               
          P.2d 438, 445 (Okla. 1999); Courtney v. First Natl. Bank, 569               
          P.2d 458, 460 (Okla. 1977); Davis v. Natl. Bank of Tulsa, 353               
          P.2d 482, 486 (Okla. 1960).  In order to establish an inter vivos           
          transfer by gift after the death of the alleged donor, the                  
          proponent of the gift must introduce evidence that is “clear,               
          explicit, and convincing as to every element.”  Fox v. Cramer (In           
          re Estate of Estes), supra at 445; see also Stinchcomb v.                   
          Stinchcomb, supra at 30; Shepherd v. Wood (In re Estate of                  
          Griffin), 599 P.2d 402, 404 (Okla. 1979); Davis v. Natl. Bank of            
          Tulsa, supra at 486; Barry v. Phillips, 329 P.2d 1042, 1043                 
          (Okla. 1958); Ratcliff v. Lee, 192 P.2d 843, 845 (Okla. 1948).              








Page:  Previous  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007