Case Name: Mabel Thomas, Respondent, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn, Respondent. (Action No. 1.); Rose Smith, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Kenneth Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.) (Consolidated actions.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1949-03-28
Citations: 275 A.D.2d 724
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mabel Thomas, Respondent, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn, Respondent. (Action No. 1.) Rose Smith, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Kenneth Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.) (Consolidated actions.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 275
Pages: 724–724

Head Matter:
Mabel Thomas, Respondent, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn, Respondent. (Action No. 1.) Rose Smith, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Kenneth Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. Brevoort Savings Bank of Brooklyn et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.) (Consolidated actions.)

Opinion:
The evidence was sufficient not only to sustain the finding that the deposit in trust for respondent Mabel Thomas, etc., was not an illusory transfer, but also to establish that the trust had become irrevocable before the death of appellant's intestate, as a consequence of the delivery of the savings bank passbook to said respondent, with intent to complete the gift. (Matter of Totten, 179 N. Y. 112; Stockert v. Dry Dock Sav. Inst., 155 App. Div. 123; Davlin v. Title Guar. & Trust Co., 229 App. Div. 269; Tibbitts v. Zink, 231 App. Div. 339.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Sneed, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ.