Estate of: Clark, R. Appeal of: Clark, D. ( 2014 )

J. A20001/14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
ESTATE OF: ROBERT D. CLARK, SR., : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
DECEASED : PENNSYLVANIA
:
APPEAL OF: DONALD B. CLARK, : No. 3436 EDA 2013
:
Appellant :
Appeal from the Final Decree, November 1, 2013,
in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Orphans’ Court Division at No. O.C. N. 201001653DE
BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., MUNDY AND MUSMANNO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED NOVEMBER 12, 2014
Appellant appeals from the final decree which dismissed appellant’s
exceptions to the adjudication of June 18, 2013 and affirmed the
adjudication. Finding no merit to the issues on appeal, we will affirm the
final decree.
This case involves a dispute as to whether two sources of money
belong to the Estate of Robert D. Clark, Sr., or whether they passed to
appellant. The first item pertains to a multiple-party account held by the
deceased and appellant. Prior to the death of the deceased, appellant
removed $24,000 from the account. The court ruled that since this sum was
not in the multiple-party account at the time of death, it did not
automatically pass to appellant under 20 Pa.C.S.A. § 6304, but instead
reverted to the Estate. The second item pertains to an IRA account.
J. A20001/14
Appellant produced an incomplete Change of Beneficiary Form that indicated
he was to receive the IRA monies at the decedent’s death. The financial
institution that housed the account had no record of the Change of
Beneficiary Form. The trial court weighed the evidence and found that there
was insufficient evidence that the decedent intended to make appellant the
beneficiary of the IRA account and awarded it to the Estate. Appellant now
brings this timely appeal.
Appellant raises the following issues on appeal:
1. Whether the court applied an incorrect legal
standard, misapplied the MPAA, and
capriciously disbelieved competent evidence in
finding that the $24,000 withdrawn from the
American Heritage Federal Credit Union
Savings account (“AHFCU Joint Account”) by
Donald where he was one of two joint account
holders, together with his father, the
Decedent, became part of Decedent’s estate as
a result of that withdrawal?
2. Whether the trial court applied an incorrect
legal standard, misapplied the Multiple Party
Account Act (“MPAA”), and capriciously
disbelieved competent evidence in ruling that
the proceeds of the American Heritage Federal
Credit Union IRA account (“AHFCU IRA”)
belong to Decedent’s estate, where the AHFCU
IRA listed Donald as the sole beneficiary on the
account, and no evidence was introduced to
controvert this intention at the hearing?
Appellant’s brief at 6.
We find no error with the trial court’s analysis. After a thorough
review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and the
-2-
J. A20001/14
well-reasoned opinion of the trial court, it is our determination that there is
no merit to the questions raised on appeal. The trial court’s careful,
seven-page opinion, filed on January 31, 2014 (dated January 24),
comprehensively discusses and properly disposes of the questions
presented. We will adopt it as our own and affirm on that basis.
Accordingly, we will affirm the final decree below.
Final decree affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 11/12/2014
-3-
Circulated 10/14/2014 03:06 PM
__
Circulated 10/14/2014 03:06 PM
Circulated 10/14/2014 03:06 PM