Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Estate of Sipe

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 31, 1980No. 144Published

1DissentRoberts, Justice

This record is clear that appellant-claimant Mary Drabik’s “signature” appeared on the bank’s signature card only by the decedent’s act of tracing her name on the card. Thus inapposite is the rule that “[introduction into evidence of a duly executed joint account signature card shifts the burden of proof to those who seek to bar enforcement of the survivorship terms of the writing and they must meet that burden with clear, precise and convincing evidence.” Bowser Estate, 485 Pa. 209, 212, 401 A.2d 733, 734 (1979). Accord, e. g., Lux Estate, 480 Pa. 256, 389 A.2d 1053 (1979).

Nonetheless, in…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Leadenham's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Wagner v. WagnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Brightbill v. BoeshoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. In Re Estate of LuxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Sivak EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962

2 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