Layman v. Layman
Gift of common stock in family corporation was gift to husband alone. Absence of gift tax returns was not conclusive of issue.
Gift of common stock in family corporation was gift to husband alone. Absence of gift tax returns was not conclusive of issue.
Checks by wife’s grandmother were gifts to wife, even though some checks were made out to the husband. Testimony by grandmother’s husband was admissible because it was not against interests of the deceased.
Forgiveness of a divorcing couple’s marital debt on the marital home by wife’s parents is marital property – not a gift to the wife alone.
Transfer of property from a parent to a child without explanatory words creates the presumption that the transfer was intended as a gift.
Under prior law, gifts were not excluded from the estate.
(1) Bonnell rule applies to gifted property. (2) By putting gifted money into joint asset, husband evinced intent to convert the property into a joint asset. (3) Bonnell applies even if the money can be traced.
Rules for gifts relaxed when parties live in same household.
Engagement ring is a conditional gift. Inquiry into how the engagement was dissolved is not necessary as no-fault policy applies.
Court has discretion to consider gifts as reducing need for maintenance.
Gifts of trust income was gift. Also, trial court’s finding that van was marital is not error: court found wife’s testimony more credible where she testified that she did not recall using the term “gift” in describing the purchase.