Opinion ID: 1940625
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: 47 River Farm Condominium, West Warwick

Text: Frederick, Sr. testified at deposition that the developer of the River Farm Condominium property had borrowed money from him and thus agreed to convey a condominium unit as loan repayment. Frederick, Sr. further testified that because Frederick, Jr. was looking to buy a house at the time, he had offered his son the unit. The father also testified that he had mentioned to his son that if he did not take the property it instead would be offered to Frederick, Sr.'s daughter. But Frederick, Jr. accepted the unit, and it was titled in his name. We conclude that the evidence presented allows no reasonable inference that Frederick, Sr. intended to retain a beneficial interest in the River Farm Condominium unit at the time of conveyance. See Cutroneo, 81 R.I. at 59, 98 A.2d at 923. Rather than rebutting the presumption that such a conveyance was a gift from father to son, Frederick, Sr.'s testimony that he otherwise would have given the unit to his daughteronly reinforces that presumption. See Reynolds, 23 R.I. at 19, 49 A. at 43. There being no dispute of material fact, we affirm the ruling of the motion justice.