Tuttle v. Webb, 731 S.E.2d 909

Grace died in 2010 leaving Henry as executor and a will that devised everything to Henry.
Lloyd filed an elective-share claim in Grace's augmented estate; Henry sought to determine Lloyd's share value.
In 2005, Grace and Lloyd deposited $118,000 from a sale into a joint account; Lloyd issued two $41,750 checks to himself and Grace, but did not cash his own check while Grace used hers to fund Henry's gifts.
Grace testified the cashier's checks to Henry were a gift; Lloyd claimed Grace said the money was for Henry's investment, leading to a factual dispute.
The circuit court ruled Lloyd's $41,750 check to Grace excluded those funds from Grace's augmented estate and found Lloyd had no need to join Grace's later gift to Henry; it also treated a $50,000 note (co-made by Grace and Lloyd) as joint debt with Lloyd liable for one-half of the first $25,000 used for home improvements and the second $25,000 for Lloyd's benefit, affecting his elective-share recovery.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the $41,750 check to Grace excluded the funds from Grace's augmented estate	Lloyd: consent to transfer to Grace removed funds from Grace's estate.	Henry: check to Grace evidenced consent/joinder for Grace's later gift to Henry.	The exclusion did not apply; Lloyd's consent did not remove funds from Grace's augmented estate.
Liability for the joint indebtedness on the $50,000 note	Lloyd: liable for half the debt; contribution should be equal between co-makers.	Henry: Lloyd should pay more for the portion used to improve property; unequal burden allowed.	Lloyd liable for only one-half of the total indebtedness.

Chappell v. Perkins, 266 Va. 413 (2003) (exclusion under Code § 64.1-16.1(B)(i) when transfer reduces decedent's estate requires surviving-spouse consent)
Brown v. Hargraves, 198 Va. 748 (1957) (co-makers of a note are jointly and severally liable; right of contribution between co-obligors)