In re Estate of Rider
South Carolina Supreme Court
756 S.E.2d 136 (2014)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Charles Rider had an investment account with Wachovia Bank, N.A. (Wachovia). Rider had terminal cancer. As a result, on June 17, 2005, Rider authorized Wachovia to transfer $2 million in assets from his account to a new account in the name of his wife, Carolyn (defendant). On June 21 and July 8, Wachovia transferred portions of the assets to Rider’s wife’s new account. Rider passed away on July 8. Wachovia was informed of Rider’s death that day. On July 11, the next business day, and October 20, Wachovia transferred the remainder of the $2 million in assets to Rider’s wife’s account. The personal representative of Rider’s estate (plaintiff) brought suit, seeking a declaratory judgment on whether the transfers made after Rider’s death were part of Rider’s estate. Rider’s wife argued that the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) applied to the transfers. Rider’s daughters from a previous marriage (the McClures) (plaintiffs) argued that agency law applied, and that an agent may not act for a principal after obtaining actual knowledge of the principal’s death. The probate court ruled that the UCC applied and that the transfers made prior to and on the next business day after Rider’s death were valid, but that the fourth transfer was invalid and thus those assets were part of Rider’s estate. The circuit court affirmed. The court of appeals reversed, holding that the third and fourth transfers were invalid and those assets were part of Rider’s estate. The Supreme Court of South Carolina granted a petition for writ of certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Beatty, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.