Opinion
No. 2-129 / 00-1820.
Filed April 10, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, DALE B. HAGEN, Judge.
Appellants appeal from an award of $123,000 plus interest to Appellee for conversion of certain certificates of deposit. AFFIRMED.
John Dollar, West Des Moines, for appellant.
Randy Hefner of Hefner, Bergkamp Rhoads, Adel, for appellee.
Considered by HAYDEN, P.J., and HABHAB and HARRIS, S.J.
Senior judges assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2001).
Appellants appeal from an award of $123,000 plus interest to Appellee for conversion of certain certificates of deposit. Affirmed.
This law suit involves nine certificates of deposit (C.D.s). Appellee, William S. Barringer (William) was originally named as a joint tenant with full rights of survivorship on each of these C.D.s.
William is the sole issue of William H. Barringer and Marion S. Barringer. William H. Barringer died on May 19, 1987 and Marion S. Barringer (decedent) died on May 31, 1999. Seven of the C.D.s were created before William's father died. William's father, mother and William were listed as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship. They had a total combined principal amount of $83,000. Five of the C.D.s had William's social security number. Interest from these C.D.s was paid to William and reported on his tax returns. Decedent removed William's name from all of the C.D.s. She also removed his social security number from four of those that had his social security number on them. Funds used to create seven of the C.D.s were from various cash gifts and an inheritance William's father received from William's paternal grandfather. These certificates were known by William and his parents as "family C.D.s." Evidence indicates William's father intended these funds pass to William upon the death of his parents.
The other C.D.s were created after the death of William's father and listed decedent and William as joint tenants with full right of survivorship. On June 1, 1990, decedent removed William's name from these C.D.s without his knowledge or consent.
Apparently, decedent attempted to prevent William from becoming the owner of these nine C.D.s upon her death. In her note book, plaintiff's Exhibit "U" had a written notation by her to this effect. Witnesses Rita Faust and Joyce Hick corroborated William's testimony decedent had removed his name from the nine C.D.s. William testified he first discovered his name had been removed from these C.D.s one day after decedent's death.
William admitted he was a poor business man. He was an artist by trade. Joyce Hick took care of his farm accounts and decedent took care of his other financial interests. She kept good account records and gave this information to Joyce Hick to prepare William's income tax returns.
This law suit was tried to the court as a law action. Our review is for corrections of errors at law. Hindricks v. Great Plains Supply Co., 609 N.W.2d 486, 490 (Iowa 2000). The district court's findings of fact have the effect of a jury verdict and are binding on the appellate court if supported by substantial evidence. Id. Evidence is substantial when a reasonable mind would accept it as adequate to reach the same findings. Evidence is not insubstantial merely because it would have supported contrary inferences. The district court's findings are broadly and liberally interrupted. In case of doubt, or ambiguity, the appellate court is to uphold, rather than defeat, the judgment. Id.
The trial court determined decedent had wrongfully converted the C.D.s to her own use. They were held as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship by William and decedent. William's father inherited seven of the C.D.s from William's paternal grandfather, E.G. Barringer, there is evidence in the record to support this.
Two of the C.D.s were obtained after William's father's death. William testified these two C.D.s were purchased by Marion from funds in William's accounts and his work from painting.
A conversion is a distinct act of dominion wrongfully exerted over another's property in denial of or inconsistent with the owner's title or rights therein, or in derogation, exclusion, or defiance of such title or rights. See Welke v. City of Davenport, 309 N.W.2d 450, 451 (Iowa 1981).
In determining the rights of parties involved in joint tenancy, the intent of the parties is controlling. Anderson v. Iowa Dep't of Human Servs., 368 N.W.2d 104, 110 (Iowa 1985).
We determine there was sufficient evidence William's father intended for the "family C.D.s" pass to William upon the death of his parents. Also, there is sufficient evidence the two C.D.s obtained after Williams' father's death were purchased with William's money.
AFFIRMED.