The re Estate of Beckley
| Docket Number: | 2005-CT-00580-SCT Linked Case(s): 2005-CA-00580-COA ; 2005-CT-00580-SCT ; 2005-CT-00580-SCT ; 2005-CA-00580-COA |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-14-2007 Opinion Author: SMITH, C.J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wills & estates - Prosecution of action by executor - Section 91-7-237 Judge(s) Concurring: Waller and Diaz, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson, Graves, Dickinson, Randolph and Lamar, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WILLS, TRUSTS AND ESTATES Writ of Certiorari: Yes Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-22-2005 Appealed from: PONTOTOC COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: Jason H. Floyd, Jr. Disposition: Awarded approximately $30,000 dollars plus interest to the decedent's brother. Case Number: 2002-0047 |
|
| Note: | This decision reverses the decision of the chancery court and the Court of Appeals and render judgment in favor of the estate for approximately $30,000 which was wrongfully withdrawn from the certificate of deposit, plus the accumulated interest. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | THE ESTATE OF LADELL BECKLEY,
DECEASED: CLARENCE BECKLEY, AS
EXECUTOR |
RHETT R. RUSSELL
D. KIRK THARP |
||
| Appellee: | JOHN BECKLEY | GENE BARTON |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wills & estates - Prosecution of action by executor - Section 91-7-237 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Ladell Beckley lived near his nephew, Larry Satterwhite. When his health began to decline, Satterwhite began caring for Ladell by tending to his health needs, providing his transportation, and performing errands for him. In September 2000, Ladell met with his attorney and executed a will. In the will, Ladell bequeathed one hundred dollars each to two individuals unconcerned with this litigation, and left the residue of his property to five of his children, in equal shares. Ladell had saved approximately seventy thousand dollars. On October 18, 2000, Ladell purchased a certificate of deposit from BancorpSouth bank in the amount of $28,699.79. This certificate of deposit was titled jointly in the name of “Ladell Beckley or John Beckley.” Under the heading “Account Ownership,” the certificate of deposit indicated that Ladell had requested a joint account with survivorship. On March 8, 2001, Ladell purchased another certificate of deposit, this one in the approximate amount of $29,000. He titled this certificate of deposit in the name of himself or Satterwhite. On October 18, 2001, Ladell bought a third certificate of deposit in the amount of $10,000 and titled it in the name of himself or Satterwhite. In January 2002, Ladell was admitted to a nursing home. Ladell executed a durable power of attorney appointing Satterwhite as his attorney-in-fact. On January 14, 2002, Satterwhite, wielding the power of attorney, withdrew the funds from the certificate of deposit titled to Ladell Beckley or John Beckley and deposited these funds into another certificate of deposit in the name of Larry Satterwhite or John Beckley. On the same day, Satterwhite also withdrew the funds from the two certificates of deposit that he jointly held with Ladell. Satterwhite used a portion of these funds to pay the balance of a loan of Ladell's in the amount of $2,769.52. With the remainder of the funds, Satterwhite purchased two certificates of deposit in the amounts of $27,136.85 and $10,066.30. These certificates of deposit were titled in Satterwhite's name only. Ladell’s health improved and he left the nursing home. In February of 2002, Ladell visited his attorney and at Ladell's request, the attorney drafted a complaint against Satterwhite for the return of the funds. The complaint was filed on February 7, 2002, initiating the instant lawsuit. Ladell passed away on March 1, 2002, and his will was admitted to probate on March 4, 2002. His son Clarence was named the executor of Ladell's estate. Clarence filed a motion, in his capacity as Executor of the Estate of Ladell Beckley, requesting that he be substituted as a party/plaintiff. John Beckley filed a motion to intervene asserting his interest in the funds from the certificate of deposit that bore his name prior to Satterwhite’s redemption of that certificate of deposit. The court determined that the funds should be put back into the certificates of deposit as they were before Satterwhite used the power of attorney. The chancellor also ordered that the proceeds of the October 18, 2000 certificate of deposit be delivered to John. Clarence appealed from the decision of the chancery court awarding approximately $30,000 dollars plus interest to John Beckley. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the chancery court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Beckley argues that the chancellor erred in awarding funds to John Beckley, instead of to the estate. Ladell's action against Satterwhite accrued during his lifetime and survived his death. Upon the executor's substitution as party-plaintiff, the executor effectively stepped into the shoes of Ladell in prosecuting the action pursuant to section 91-7-237. The estate could then recover the funds that Ladell might have recovered had he lived to final judgment. No testimony was presented that Ladell intended to return the money to the joint account or that he desired his brother to obtain any of his proceeds from the lawsuit. Additionally, in the complaint that Ladell filed against Satterwhite, Ladell’s prayer was for “judgment of and from [Satterwhite] for his damages including, but not limited to, loss of possession and title of property. . . .” Nowhere in his pleadings did Ladell ask the chancellor to restore the closed certificate of deposit account. Ladell’s sworn complaint, his will and the testimony of his children all indicate that his intent was for the children to have the funds, not his brother. The chancellor exceeded his broad remedial powers in recreating the certificate of deposit, as this remedy ignores the statutory right of the executor of the estate under section 91-7-237 to prosecute Ladell's lawsuit against Satterwhite and collect the proceeds from a judgment in his favor. The appropriate remedy was to return the proceeds of the lawsuit, the approximate amount of $30,000 plus interest, to the estate. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
