ESTATE OF JONES v. MILLER

Citations

• 2025 OK CIV APP 29

Syllabus

¶ 1 Jeannie Miller (\Miller\ or \Appellant\) has appealed the trial court's award of summary judgment in favor of Teresa L. Davis (\Davis\ or \Appellee\), arguing that the trial court erred in its conclusion that the real property at issue (\the Property\) had not been properly conveyed from the decedent, Lorene Jones, to Miller. Davis utilized a Transfer on Death Deed to effectuate the conveyance. The issue in this case arose because the TODD had not been signed by Jones, but only by Miller who had been acting as an agent of Jones' under a Power of Attorney. The trial court ruled in favor of Davis, holding that the Property was an asset of Jones' estate after determining Jones had not expressly provided Miller with the authority to execute a TODD, as required by 58 O.S. § 3024 (A)(4). We find that the plain and unambiguous meaning of 58 O.S. § 1252 (A), demands that a TODD must be \signed by the record owner of interest\ in order to effectuate the TODD. Thus, in the narrow context of an attorney-in-fact that is acting pursuant to a POA, § 1252(A), prohibits a TODD that is not signed by the \record owner\. In this case, because Jones was the \record owner\, the TODD was ineffective. Alternatively, we further find that the trial court correctly interpreted and applied the statutory guidelines of 58 O.S. § 3024 (A), because Miller's execution of the TODD constituted the \creation of a beneficiary designation\ and, in light of the fact that Miller lacked a specific authority under the POA to do so, the TODD was invalid. Consequently, we affirm the result reached by the trial court and find that the TODD at issue here to be invalid.