Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

plaintiffstatuteappealtrialwillcase law
plaintiffstatuteappealtrialwill

Related Cases

Olson v. Albert, 523 A.2d 585
View Case »
Annicelli v. Town of South Kingstown, 463 A.2d 133
View Case »
Washington v. Harrison, 299 Ga.App. 335, 682 S.E.2d 679, 09 FCDR 2668
View Case »
Stephens v. Mann, 50 N.C.App. 133, 272 S.E.2d 771
View Case »
Fernandez v. Vasquez, Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2009 WL 179781
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Duncan v. Vassaur, 550 P.2d 929, 1976 OK 65

Facts

Edgar Vassaur, Jr. and Betty E. Vassaur owned property as joint tenants. After Betty shot and killed Edgar, she conveyed the property to her father, William M. Duncan. Edgar Vassaur, Sr., as the administrator of his son's estate, claimed ownership of half the property and filed a cross-petition against Duncan, who sought to quiet title to the property. The trial court ruled in favor of Duncan, but the Court of Appeals reversed the decision, leading to a certiorari by Duncan to the Supreme Court.

Edgar Vassaur, Jr. and Betty E. Vassaur owned property as joint tenants. After Betty shot and killed Edgar, she conveyed the property to her father, William M. Duncan.

Issue

Did the murder of Edgar Vassaur, Jr. by his wife, Betty E. Vassaur, terminate the joint tenancy and convert it into a tenancy in common, thereby affecting the ownership of the property conveyed to her father?

Did the murder of Edgar Vassaur, Jr. by his wife, Betty E. Vassaur, terminate the joint tenancy and convert it into a tenancy in common, thereby affecting the ownership of the property conveyed to her father?

Rule

The Oklahoma 'slayer statute' prohibits a person convicted of murder or manslaughter from inheriting from the victim or receiving any interest in the victim's estate.

The Oklahoma 'slayer statute' prohibits a person convicted of murder or manslaughter from inheriting from the victim or receiving any interest in the victim's estate.

Analysis

The court determined that the murder committed by Betty was an act inconsistent with the continued existence of the joint tenancy, thus terminating it and converting the ownership to a tenancy in common. The court referenced the slayer statute and previous case law to support the conclusion that the joint tenancy was severed by the act of murder, allowing for the distribution of the property to the heirs of the deceased husband and the murderer.

The court determined that the murder committed by Betty was an act inconsistent with the continued existence of the joint tenancy, thus terminating it and converting the ownership to a tenancy in common.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the Court of Appeals opinion, and reversed the trial court's judgment, remanding the case with directions to allow the plaintiff to prove his status as a bona fide purchaser.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the Court of Appeals opinion, and reversed the trial court's judgment, remanding the case with directions to allow the plaintiff to prove his status as a bona fide purchaser.

Who won?

The prevailing party was William M. Duncan, as the court ruled in favor of allowing him the opportunity to prove he was a bona fide purchaser without knowledge of the murder.

The prevailing party was William M. Duncan, as the court ruled in favor of allowing him the opportunity to prove he was a bona fide purchaser without knowledge of the murder.

You must be