Judges: DAN MORALES, Attorney General of Texas
Filed Date: 3/26/1991
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/6/2016
Mr. John R. Hale Commissioner Credit Union Department 914 East Anderson Lane Austin, Texas 78752-0278
Re: Termination of a depositor's interest in a joint account by deletion of the depositor's name at the direction of another joint owner (RQ-2190)
Dear Mr. Hale:
You ask if section
The provisions of Section 439 of this code to rights of survivorship are determined by the form of the account at the death of a party. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, this form may be altered by written order given by a party to the financial institution to change the form of the account or to stop or vary payment under the terms of the account. The order or request must be signed by a party, received by the financial institution during the party's lifetime, and not countermanded by other written order of the same party during his lifetime. (Emphasis added.)
At issue is the scope of the emphasized language.
Section 440 is part of chapter XI of the Probate Code. That chapter governs "nontestamentary transfers," including joint accounts established with financial institutions (whether or not there is a right of survivorship). See H.B. 329, Acts 1979, 66th Leg,, ch. 713 at 1740, 1756. Section
The three provisions, sections
The provisions of Sections 438 through 440 of this code that concern beneficial ownership as between parties, or as between parties and P.O.D. [after-death] payees or beneficiaries of multiple-party accounts, are relevant only to controversies between these persons and their creditors and other successors, and have no bearing on the power of withdrawal of these persons as determined by the terms of account contracts. (Emphasis added.)
Our reading of the three provisions, together with section 437 above, convinces us that section 440 concerns only a party's directive as to "rights of survivorship." The power given by section 440 to "change the form" is not bestowed upon "one or more of the parties" as is the power of withdrawal allowed by section 444. The section 440 power may be exercised only by "a party," and the written order or request to make the change must be received by the financial institution during that party's lifetime and not countermanded by "the same part during his lifetime."2 See also Prob. Code subsection
The phrase, "this form," in the second sentence of section 440 refers to "the form of the account at the death of a party" by which rights of survivorship are to be determined. That language gives "a party" unilateral power to "change the form of the account or to stop or vary the payment under the terms of the account" only as to rights of survivorship (i.e., to stop or vary payment to particular beneficiaries which otherwise would be controlled by the original terms of the account contract. Cf. McCarty v. First State Bank Trust Co.,
Thus, in answer to your specific question, section 440 does not authorize one owner of a joint account to unilaterally "change the form of the account" so as to compromise the interest of another joint owner. See American Nat'l Bank of Beaumont v. Sneed's Shipbuilding. Inc.,
You ask a second question about other possible methods of permitting the deletion of a party's name from a joint account, but because of its general and hypothetical nature we are unable to address it.
Yours very truly,
DAN MORALES Attorney General of Texas
WILL PRYOR First Assistant Attorney General
MARY KELLER Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY (Ret) Special Assistant Attorney General
RENEA HICKS Special Assistant Attorney General
SUSAN GARRISON Acting Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Susan Garrison Assistant Attorney General
The ``owner' of an account providing for rights of survivorship may alter those rights by written notice to the financial institution. House Committee on Judiciary, Bill Analysis, C.S.H.B. 329, 66th Leg. (1979).
First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of San Antonio v. ... , 1986 Tex. App. LEXIS 11892 ( 1986 )
Wright v. Commercial & Savings Bank , 297 Md. 148 ( 1983 )
FIRST STATE BANK AND TRUST CO., CARTHAGE, TEXAS v. McCarty , 30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 421 ( 1987 )
McCarty v. First State Bank & Trust Co. , 1987 Tex. App. LEXIS 6220 ( 1987 )