Legal Opinion

Estate of Dimond

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 2008No. 24878PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KONENKAMP, Justice.

[¶ 1.] Although never decided in South Dakota, many jurisdictions hold that, as a general rule, an unexplained transfer of money or property from a parent to a child creates a rebuttable presumption that the transfer was intended as a gift. In this case, nine months after a mother gave her son $25,000, he died. Declaring that the money was a loan, she sought reimbursement from her son’s estate as an unsecured creditor. In a hearing to resolve the mother’s claim, the circuit court applied the presumption of a gift and ruled that it could be rebutted only by clear and…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Peters v. LohrSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Hinds v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1959
  3. Bankers Trust Co. v. Bank of Rockville Center Trust Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
  4. Matter of Estate of HillNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Brightbill v. BoeshoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Stockwell v. StockwellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Hubbard v. CITY OF PIERRESouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Davis v. Ssd Dept. of Ed.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Gumbs-Heyliger v. CMW & Associates Corp.District Court, Virgin Islands · 2014
  5. Stavig v. StavigSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API