Question

6. Joint Tenancy Verna M. Chappell owned a piece of real property. Subsequently, Chappell transferred the property to herself and her niece, Bertha M. Stewart, as joint tenants. When Chappell died 16 years later, Chappell’s gross estate was set at $28,321, which included the value of the house. Claims, debts, and charges against the estate totaled $19,451, which included a $14,040 claim by Lorna M. Rembe for services provided as conservator. The probate assets available to pay the claims and debts came to only $1,571 if the real property went to Stewart as the joint tenant. Rembe sued, alleging that the value of the real property should be used to pay off Chappell’s debts and claims. Who wins? Rembe v. Stewart, 387 N.W.2d 313, Web 1986 Iowa Sup.

Lexis 1177 (Supreme Court of Iowa)

6. Joint Tenancy Verna M. Chappell owned a piece of real property. Subsequently, Chappell transferred the property to herself and her niece, Bertha M. Stewart, as joint tenants. When Chappell died 16 years later, Chappell’s gross estate was set at $28,321, which included the value of the house. Claims, debts, and charges against the estate totaled $19,451, which included a $14,040 claim by Lorna M. Rembe for services provided as conservator. The probate assets available to pay the claims and debts came to only $1,571 if the real property went to Stewart as the joint tenant. Rembe sued, alleging that the value of the real property should be used to pay off Chappell’s debts and claims. Who wins? Rembe v. Stewart, 387 N.W.2d 313, Web 1986 Iowa Sup.

Lexis 1177 (Supreme Court of Iowa)

Answer 1

The important problems  relevant to the case are mentioned below:

• According to the Joint Tenancy norms, in the event of the death of a tenant his/her interests are transferred to the co-tenants. This would lead to the transfer of VMC’s real property to BMS.

• LMR has debts to be claimed against VMC’s property, as she is dead.

Decision of the Court and Conclusion

The trial court did not settle the decision in favor of LMR and rejected her request for her claim settlement.

LMR took the case forward to the Court of Appeals which stated that “the general rule that a surviving joint tenant takes real property free of the debts of the deceased joint tenant appears to be well-settled, at least in most jurisdictions”

The court stated that considering the facts of the case and other conflicting consideration related to joint tenancy it is not prudent to change this rule. It is more legislative issue rather than judicial issue.

Therefore, the Court of Appeals declined to change of rule of law in her favor.