Kitchen v. Guarisco

Sophie Cunningham and her husband had three children, two daughters and a son. After Cunningham’s husband died, Cunningham opened five certificates of deposit and a checking account and listed both Cunningham and her daughter, Vivian Guarisco (defendant), as the names on all the accounts. However, for all six accounts, (1) Cunningham’s name was listed first, (2) only Cunningham’s Social Security number was listed for federal tax-identification purposes, (3) Cunningham’s address was listed as the contact address, (4) the 1099 tax forms for reporting taxable interest earned on the accounts were sent to Cunningham, and (5) Cunningham reported the taxable interest on her personal tax returns. When Cunningham died, Guarisco cashed out all six accounts and kept the money. Cunningham’s other daughter, Caroline Kitchen (plaintiff), was the administratrix of, i.e., person in charge of administering, Cunningham’s estate. Kitchen claimed that the money in the six accounts had belonged solely to Cunningham and, therefore, was now part of Cunningham’s estate. Guarisco disagreed, claiming that because she was listed as a joint owner on the accounts, the account money became hers once Cunningham died. Kitchen sued Guarisco, seeking to have the account money returned to Cunningham’s estate. At trial, Kitchen provided detailed evidence showing that (1) Cunningham had been the only one to deposit money into the accounts and (2) the deposited money came from Cunningham’s husband’s estate and a severance package that had been provided by Cunningham’s previous employer. In contrast, Guarisco provided vague, self-serving testimony alleging that (1) she had provided the deposited money and (2) the purpose of the joint accounts was to give Cunningham access to Guarisco’s money to take care of Guarisco’s college-age daughter if Guarisco died first. The trial court found Kitchen’s evidence more credible and ruled that (1) the money in the accounts had belonged solely to Cunningham and (2) Cunningham had added Guarisco’s name only as a convenience for Cunningham. The trial court ordered Guarisco to return approximately $26,000 to Cunningham’s estate, and Guarisco appealed.