869 S.E.2d 868
S.C. Ct. App.2022Background
- Decedent (Thomas G. Moore) died December 20, 2013; Michael Dennis Moore (Appellant) was named personal representative in a 1997 will.
- Decedent and Michael owned 334 Cypress Avenue as joint tenants with right of survivorship; they signed a purchase agreement to sell the property in November 2013 (before Decedent’s death).
- Closing occurred December 27, 2013 (after Decedent’s death); deed was signed by Michael alone and he received the sale proceeds.
- Probate court found the sale contract encumbered the property, severed the joint tenancy, and awarded one-half of the proceeds to Decedent’s estate; circuit court affirmed.
- Appellant appealed contesting (1) severance of the joint tenancy by the sales contract, (2) preservation of objections to late-submitted evidence and new claims at probate trial, and (3) integration of an unsigned separate document found in Decedent’s safe into the Will.
- Court of Appeals: reversed on severance (joint tenancy not severed by the contract), affirmed non‑preservation of the evidentiary objection, and declined to consider the Will‑integration claim for lack of record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the executory contract to sell the jointly‑owned property severed the joint tenancy with right of survivorship | Michael: contract did not terminate the joint tenancy; Decedent died before closing so survivorship vested in Michael | Respondents/Probate court: the sales contract encumbered the property and thereby defeated the survivorship right, entitling the estate to half the proceeds | Court of Appeals reversed: execution of the sales contract (silent as to severance) did not automatically sever the joint tenancy; estate not entitled to proceeds |
| Whether Appellant preserved his objection that Respondents submitted prejudicial evidence and new claims at trial | Michael: probate court allowed late evidence/claims and denied his opportunity to respond | Respondents: Appellant failed to object at trial and did not pursue discovery; issue first raised on appeal | Affirmed: issue not preserved for appellate review |
| Whether a separate unsigned typed document found in Decedent’s safe should be integrated into the Will | Michael: unsigned, unwitnessed, undated separate paper should not be integrated | Probate court/Respondents: document should be integrated as testamentary instruction | Court declined to consider on appeal because Appellant failed to include the Will and the document in the record |
Key Cases Cited
- South Carolina Fed. Sav. Bank v. San-A-Bel Corp., 307 S.C. 76, 413 S.E.2d 852 (Ct. App. 1992) (recognizes purchaser under executory contract has an equitable lien)
- Estate of Phillips v. Nyhus, 874 P.2d 154 (Wash. 1994) (discusses effect of contract on joint tenancy and survivorship)
- Weise v. Kizer, 435 So. 2d 381 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) (holds contract to sell does not automatically sever joint tenancy absent intent)
- Staubes v. City of Folly Beach, 339 S.C. 406, 529 S.E.2d 543 (S.C. 2000) (issues not raised and ruled on below are not preserved on appeal)
- Bonaparte v. Floyd, 291 S.C. 427, 354 S.E.2d 40 (Ct. App. 1987) (appellant bears burden to provide sufficient record on appeal)
- In re Est. of Hyman, 362 S.C. 20, 606 S.E.2d 205 (Ct. App. 2004) (standard of review for probate cases: legal questions reviewed de novo; factual findings affirmed if supported)