Legal Opinion
Hickman v. Barrett
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 8, 1935No. 24488PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPhelps, J.
The main question in this case is whether the holder of a bank deposit certificate, payable to himself or the owner of the deposited funds, or to both of them, may, after the death of the owner of the funds, cash the certificate at the bank and retain the proceeds as his own property, — • or whether, on the other hand, the money so withdrawn from the bank remains the property of the deceased’s estate.
Several years prior to his death on January, 3, 1929, Charles Munsell was ill and confined to the home of his son-in-law, F. E. Barrett, who transacted all of his business for him, including the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of BolinNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Taylor v. HenryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1878
- Denigan v. San Francisco Savings UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Weitz v. MouldenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Drinkhouse v. German Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hendricks v. Grant County BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1963
- Green v. ComerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
- Flesher v. FlesherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953
- Crane v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Louise Heldenbrand and O. J. Heldenbrand v. Bloise Stevenson, Administrator of the Estate of Charles Oscar Stevenson, DeceasedCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1957
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.