Coley v. Walker
1996 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 510, 1996 WL 359920, 680 So. 2d 352 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A gift causa mortis is valid when the donor makes the gift in immediate apprehension of death from a specific, impending peril. The fear associated with undergoing a major medical procedure, such as open-heart surgery, satisfies the requirement that the gift be made in contemplation of imminent death.
Facts:
- Willodean Duke Cray, age 69, was hospitalized after what was determined to be a major heart attack.
- Doctors informed Cray that she needed to undergo open-heart surgery.
- Before the surgery, Cray was told she could not wear her rings into the operating room.
- Cray gave her rings to her niece, Margaret Ann Coley, for safekeeping.
- While being transported to the operating room, Cray, in the presence of her minister, told Coley that if she died during surgery, she wanted Coley to keep the rings.
- Cray died during the surgical procedure.
Procedural Posture:
- Margie Walker and Nancy Duke, co-administratrices of Willodean Duke Cray's estate, filed a petition in probate court seeking the return of personal property, including rings, from Margaret Ann Coley.
- Margaret Ann Coley removed the action from the probate court to the circuit court.
- The circuit court (trial court) entered a judgment finding that Cray had not met the requirements for a gift causa mortis of the rings.
- The trial court specifically found that the estate had not proven Cray believed her death to be 'imminent' when she communicated her intent regarding the rings.
- Margaret Ann Coley, as appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to this intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a donor's transfer of personal property while anticipating the risks of imminent open-heart surgery satisfy the 'immediate apprehension of death' element required for a valid gift causa mortis?
Opinions:
Majority - Monroe, Judge
Yes, a donor's transfer of property while anticipating open-heart surgery satisfies the 'immediate apprehension of death' element for a gift causa mortis. The court reasoned that facing a major, high-risk procedure like open-heart surgery creates a realistic fear of impending and imminent peril. This situation is distinguishable from a general apprehension of death, such as a soldier going off to war, as established in 'Reedy v. Kelley.' The court found that Cray's knowledge of the serious risks associated with her imminent surgery was sufficient to meet the requirement, aligning with prior cases like 'Smith v. Eshelman' where gifts made before operations were upheld. Therefore, the gift of the rings was a valid gift causa mortis.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the 'imminent apprehension of death' standard for gifts causa mortis by applying it to the context of modern medical procedures. It establishes that a specific, high-risk surgery constitutes a sufficient peril to validate a deathbed gift, distinguishing it from more general or speculative fears of death. This precedent provides clearer guidance for estate litigation, making it easier to uphold a donor's intent for gifts made in contemplation of major medical events. The ruling reinforces the principle that the donor's state of mind regarding a known, immediate danger is the critical factor.
