Legal Opinion

Bunn Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 17, 1964No. Appeal, 34PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell,

Appellant claims a bank account as an inter vivos gift from his mother, Mrs. Bunn. Although the decision in this class of case often depends upon the exact wording of the deposit account and the signature card and the agreement, if any, accompanying it, the law and the proof required in such cases are well settled: Sivak Estate, 409 Pa. 261, 185 A. 2d 778; Cox Estate, 405 Pa. 444, 176 A. 2d 894. In Sivak Estate the Court said (pages 264-265) :

“In our recent decisions we have spelled out the requisite elements of a gift inter vivos. In Cox Estate, 405 Pa. 444,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Furjanick EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  2. Lochinger v. HanlonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. King EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. Petro v. Secary EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Martella EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of ChiaraSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Brozenic EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  3. Cilvik EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  4. Moore EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  5. Zabek EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970

7 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