Dane Lynn Taylor v. Rebecca Godfrey Taylor
2023CA1237
La. Ct. App.May 31, 2024Background
- Dane and Rebecca Taylor married in 1988 under a separate property regime established by a marriage contract.
- Rebecca was injured in a 2017 car accident and received a $403,000 net settlement in a related lawsuit.
- Upon Rebecca's instructions, her attorney issued a check for $380,000 from the settlement, payable to Dane.
- After Dane filed for divorce, a dispute arose over whether the settlement funds were Rebecca’s separate property or had been donated to Dane.
- At trial, conflicting testimonies were given regarding Rebecca's intent in transferring the funds to Dane.
- The trial court found Rebecca lacked donative intent, attributing the transfer to her belief that it would preserve her eligibility for disability benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership of settlement proceeds | Rebecca: Funds are her separate property | Dane: Funds were a valid donation (gift) to him | Rebecca owns them |
| Existence of valid donation inter vivos | No donative intent; transfer was to "hide" funds | Rebecca intended to irrevocably gift proceeds to Dane | No valid donation |
| Compliance with formal donation requirements | No formalities needed for check; no intent | Check transfer completed donation | No donative intent |
| Disability eligibility concerns | Acted on mistaken advice re: $2,000 account limit | Not relied upon | Rebecca’s belief controls |
Key Cases Cited
- Ballex v. Ballex, 308 So. 3d 332 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2020) (explains donations of a check may be effective without formality beyond negotiation)
- Stobart v. State through Dept. of Transp. and Dev., 617 So. 2d 880 (La. 1993) (sets manifest error/clearly wrong standard of appellate review)
- Schindler v. Biggs, 964 So. 2d 1049 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2007) (donative intent is a fact question)
- Matherne v. Polite, 355 So. 3d 664 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2022) (donee must prove donation by strong, convincing evidence)