Matter of Durcan

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, First Department held that a claimant was not entitled to proceeds from the decedent's individual retirement accounts because the purported beneficiary change was not made in a signed writing as required by EPTL 13-3.2(e)(1). The court rejected substantial-compliance and speculative-mailing arguments and affirmed the decree directing turnover of the IRA assets to the petitioner.

Holdings

1. A beneficiary designation for the decedent's IRAs was ineffective absent a writing signed by the decedent; Cunney was therefore not entitled to the IRA proceeds despite the decedent's clear intent to designate her.
2. The doctrine of substantial compliance did not excuse the absence of a signed writing in the context of the decedent's retirement accounts.
3. The claim that the beneficiary designation form may have been lost in the mail or at Morgan Stanley was speculative and did not defeat summary judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an unsigned client data form and evidence of the decedent's intent could satisfy the statutory requirement of a signed writing changing the beneficiary of an individual retirement account.
2. Whether the doctrine of substantial compliance excused the absence of a signed change-of-beneficiary form for the decedent's IRAs.
3. Whether the possibility that the beneficiary designation form was lost in the mail or at Morgan Stanley created a triable issue of fact.

Disposition

affirmed