In re Knickerbocker
Utah Supreme Court
912 P.2d 969 (1996)
- Written by Rebecca Green, JD
Facts
Bradford Knickerbocker (plaintiff) and Christine Knickerbocker married in 1984. In 1991, Christine filed for divorce, and the court awarded her exclusive temporary use of a house she owned in joint tenancy with Bradford. Soon after she filed for divorce, Christine learned she had a life-threatening disease. As a joint tenant, at her death, Christine’s interest would revert to Bradford. In an effort to preserve assets for her children from a prior marriage, Christine decided to establish a trust for her two children. Christine executed a deed conveying her interest in the house to herself “as a Tenant in Common.” As a tenant in common, at her death, Christine’s interest could go to anyone she designated. The deed was recorded. After establishing the trust for her two children, Christine executed a deed conveying her one-half interest in the house to the trustees. Upon Christine’s death, Bradford filed an action against James Cannon (defendant), Christine’s brother and the representative of Christine’s estate. The action challenged the severance of the joint tenancy. The trial court held that Christine’s attempt to sever the joint tenancy was legally ineffective, because she did not convey the property to a third party. Cannon appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Howe, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.