Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend and save up to 50%!
5-COURSE MULTI-PACK $180
10-COURSE MULTI-PACK $300
Accelerated 1-year bachelor's program
Question 1
Jason and his brother, Raymond, opened a joint bank account at Bank of America. Jason made the initial deposit of $5,000. Periodically, Raymond would deposit money into the account and make withdrawals. A year after opening the account, Jason was killed in a car accident. At that time, the account had a $13,000 balance. Raymond is entitled to the money.
Correct Regarding joint bank accounts, there is a rebuttable presumption that the funds should pass to the survivor upon the death of the depositor. Here, although Jason made the opening deposit, Raymond also deposited money into the account. Since they both actively used the account, it truly was a joint venture. As such, Raymond is entitled to the money.
Incorrect! Regarding joint bank accounts, there is a rebuttable presumption that the funds should pass to the survivor upon the death of the depositor. Here, although Jason made the opening deposit, Raymond also deposited money into the account. Since they both actively used the account, it truly was a joint venture. As such, Raymond is entitled to the money.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 2
Jason and his brother, Raymond, opened a joint bank account at Bank of America. Jason made the initial deposit of $5,000. Raymond was added to the account for convenience because Jason was about to go to start an internship abroad and wanted to maintain a bank account in his home city. Periodically, Jason would send money to Raymond to deposit into the account. Raymond never put any of his money into the account. A year after opening the account, Jason was killed in a train accident. At that time, the account had a $13,000 balance. Raymond is entitled to the money.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct That's the correct response. Regarding joint bank accounts, there is a rebuttable presumption that the funds should pass to the survivor upon the death of the depositor. Nevertheless, if the joint account was created for convenience without the intention of conferring a gift to the other party, the funds would instead become part of the decedent's estate. Here, Jason added his brother to the account for convenience. He never intended for Raymond to receive the money that he had deposited into the account. As such, the money goes to Jason's estate.
Incorrect! That's the correct response. Regarding joint bank accounts, there is a rebuttable presumption that the funds should pass to the survivor upon the death of the depositor. Nevertheless, if the joint account was created for convenience without the intention of conferring a gift to the other party, the funds would instead become part of the decedent's estate. Here, Jason added his brother to the account for convenience. He never intended for Raymond to receive the money that he had deposited into the account. As such, the money goes to Jason's estate.
Question 3
Skylar established two Totten trusts at National City Bank. The first one was in trust for his son, Timothy; the second one was in trust for his daughter, Kendall. Each account usually contained $100,000. Skylar had been a widower for 10 years before he met Candace, who was 30 years his junior. They married six months after meeting. Shortly thereafter Skylar had to have surgery for lung cancer. While he was in the hospital, Candace emptied all his bank accounts (she was a signatory on the accounts), including the two Totten trusts. Skylar died. Timothy and Kendall sued Candace for the money that was in the Totten trusts.
Correct A Totten trust can be revoked by a complete withdrawal of the funds by the depositor during his or her lifetime or by a provision in the depositor's will explicitly revoking it. Here, Candace withdrew the money from the accounts prior to Skylar's death. This action caused the trust relationship to be revoked. Accordingly, Candace gets to keep the money.
Incorrect! A Totten trust can be revoked by a complete withdrawal of the funds by the depositor during his or her lifetime or by a provision in the depositor's will explicitly revoking it. Here, Candace withdrew the money from the accounts prior to Skylar's death. This action caused the trust relationship to be revoked. Accordingly, Candace gets to keep the money.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 4
Through her job, Calista has a $100,000 life insurance policy that names her sister, Mabel, as the beneficiary. While on a business trip, Calista becomes ill and dies. The insurance company pays the $100,000 proceeds to Mabel. Calista's husband, Wilbur, sues Mabel for the $100,000, since he is the sole beneficiary in Calista's will. Wilbur is entitled to the $100,000.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Life insurance proceeds pass at death pursuant to the beneficiary designation on the policy itself. Any will provision is ineffective. Here, the policy itself named Mabel as the beneficiary. Accordingly, the will's naming Wilbur as sole beneficiary of Calista's estate is irrelevant. Mabel gets to keep the money.
Incorrect! Life insurance proceeds pass at death pursuant to the beneficiary designation on the policy itself. Any will provision is ineffective. Here, the policy itself named Mabel as the beneficiary. Accordingly, the will's naming Wilbur as sole beneficiary of Calista's estate is irrelevant. Mabel gets to keep the money.
Question 5
Through her job, Calista has a $50,000 qualified retirement plan that names her mother, Agnes, and sister, Mabel, as the beneficiaries, primary and contingent, respectively. Last year, Calista married Wilbur; however, she did not add him as a beneficiary on the retirement plan. Agnes died two years ago. While on a business trip, Calista becomes very ill and dies. Wilbur is the sole beneficiary of Calista's estate.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Retirement plan benefits are payable in the same manner as life insurance policies'to the designated beneficiary on the policy itself. Here, Mabel was a contingent beneficiary. If the primary beneficiary was deceased, she would be the next person in line to receive the proceeds. Since Mabel is still alive and the only beneficiary on the plan, she is entitled to the funds.
Incorrect! Retirement plan benefits are payable in the same manner as life insurance policies'to the designated beneficiary on the policy itself. Here, Mabel was a contingent beneficiary. If the primary beneficiary was deceased, she would be the next person in line to receive the proceeds. Since Mabel is still alive and the only beneficiary on the plan, she is entitled to the funds.