Gifts. For some time before she died, Merle Zimmerman allowed her good friend, Joan Robertson, to assist her with her financial affairs. Robertson was given access to Zimmerman's funds, through joint bank accounts, and to Zimmerman's safe-deposit box

Question

At one point, Zim-merman gave Robertson a number of municipal bonds to "put . . . in safekeeping." Robertson noticed that the bonds had been placed in a series of Manila envelopes, and each envelope contained a piece of paper on which was written the name of one of Zimmerman's relative. One envelope, which contained bonds with a face value of $22,000, had Robertson's name in it. When Zimmerman died, Robertson distributed the bonds to the people whose names were in the envelopes and retained the bonds in the envelope with her own name on it. Zimmerman's estate claimed ownership of the bonds. Robertson asserted that Zimmerman had made a gift to her of the bonds. Discuss whether an effective gift had been made.

Answer 1

Gifts
According to the court, an effective gift had not been made. The court first summarized the es-sential elements of a gift of personal property: "(1) a present intention to make a gift on the part of the donor, (2) a delivery of the property by the donor to the donee, and (3) an acceptance by the donee whose ownership takes effect immediately and absolutely." Although the third ele-ment obviously presented no problem, the court held that the first two elements were lacking. A major problem was that the only evidence of the bond transaction was Robertson's oral testimo-ny. Because Robertson had complete access to Zimmerman's safe-deposit box, it was also possible—absent evidence to the contrary—that Robertson could have acquired the bonds without Zimmerman's knowledge. But even Robertson's testimony, in itself, did not establish a valid gift. Robertson's testimony did not indicate that Zimmerman had expressed an intention to make a gift to Robertson. All Zimmerman had apparently asked Robertson to do was to place the bonds in "safekeeping," which did not indicate that a gift was being made. Although Robertson argued that the names on the slips of papers placed in the envelopes by Zimmerman indicated Zimmerman's intention to make a gift, these papers were not presented in evidence at trial. But even if they had been introduced as evidence of Zimmerman's intent, the delivery element still remained unsatisfied. "Even written language expressing an intent to give," the court stated, "does not constitute a gift in the absence of a complete and uncon-ditional delivery."