Opinion ID: 1878930
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: whether the trial court erred in failing to require reilly to repay funds she misappropriated for personal use?

Text: ¶ 23. Crist and Ford requested that the Chancellor require Reilly to reimburse Dunn's estate the $28,000 she acquired upon cashing in one of Dunn's CDs. [4] Rather than ruling on the propriety of Reilly's cashing in this CD and expending some of the funds for personal matters, the learned Chancellor simply held, that this particular CD was set up by Harold Harwood to include Reilly as a co-owner. As such, the Chancellor determined that the money belonged to Reilly as the sole surviving joint tenant, was not a part of Dunn's estate, and that Crist and Ford were not entitled to any portion of those funds. ¶ 24. Having previously reached the conclusion that at the time Reilly was added to these accounts as a co-owner, no confidential relationship existed between Harold and Reilly, and as such, no presumption of undue influence arose, necessarily, the CD cashed in by Reilly, passed outside Dunn's estate, as did the other, existing accounts. We affirm the Chancellor's holding that the account passed outside of Dunn's estate.