Holmes v. Beatty

Thomas and Kathryn Holmes were married. During the marriage, they accumulated over 10 million dollars in brokerage accounts. Two of the accounts were opened with JT Ten listed in the title and next to the Holmeses’ signatures. The agreement asked to check a box whether the accounts would be held in joint tenancy with the right of survivorship or as tenants in common, but neither box was checked. In another account agreement, the Holmes checked a box labeled Joint WROS under a section titled account classification. Kathryn subsequently died, and Thomas’s death soon followed. Kathryn’s executor (plaintiff) filed suit against Thomas’s executor (defendant), seeking a declaration that all the assets were community property. Kathryn’s executor argued that as community property, only 50 percent of the accounts passed to Thomas at Kathryn’s death, as opposed to 100 percent if the accounts were held in joint tenancy with the right of survivorship. The trial court held that none of the agreements clearly reflected an intent to own the accounts with the right of survivorship. The court of appeals agreed with the trial court about the JT Ten accounts, but it reversed as to the Joint WROS account because the box identifying the account’s classification was affirmatively selected, which signaled clear intent. Thomas’s and Kathryn’s executors appealed.