In Araiza v. Younkin, 2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1688, a provision in a decedent’s revocable inter vivos trust was held sufficient to find an intent to change the beneficiary of a totten trust which was not part of the revocable trust. The revocable trust expressly stated decedent’s intent to give the totten trust account to her mother rather than her step-daughter, who was the beneficiary stated on the signature card. The trust listed “savings accounts” as trust property, although there was apparently no formal transfer of the totten trust account to the revocable trust. Under a California statute providing that totten trust property goes to the named beneficiary unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent, the court decided that the revocable trust provision constituted clear and convincing evidence, even though the methods of modifying multiple party accounts were stated in the statute and were not followed in this case.
Special thanks to Martin D. Begleiter (Ellis and Nelle Levitt Distinguished Professor of Law, Drake University Law School) for providing this case summary.
