## Facts

- Thomas J. Lanahan executed a 1966 will leaving all of his property to his wife, Irene A. Lanahan, who was also named executrix.
- In 1983, Thomas opened a $50,000 savings account in his name only at Nevada Savings and Loan Association (NSLA), later converting and renewing it as a certificate of deposit.
- In September 1986, Thomas signed an NSLA “Change of Ownership” card changing the account title to “Thomas J. Lanahan as trustee for” his daughter, Susan T. Lanahan Byrd; NSLA also altered the signature card to match.
- The card included a trust declaration stating Thomas could revoke the arrangement during his lifetime and that, upon his death, the proceeds would be payable to Susan.
- Thomas continued to receive all interest payments until his death in January 1987; neither Irene nor Susan knew of the account or the change during Thomas’s lifetime.
- After Thomas’s death, NSLA declined to pay Irene due to the trust designation and filed an interpleader, depositing the funds with the court.
- After a bench trial, the district court awarded the proceeds to Irene as executrix, reasoning the bank documents were not executed as a will and would improperly contradict or partially revoke Thomas’s prior will.

## Issues

1. Whether Nevada law recognizes and enforces Totten trusts (savings deposits designated “in trust for” a beneficiary, revocable by the depositor during life and payable at death).
2. Whether Thomas’s NSLA account documents created a valid Totten trust in favor of Susan.
3. Whether treating the account as a Totten trust impermissibly conflicts with, or revokes, Thomas’s earlier will.
4. To what extent any community-property interest limits the effectiveness of the Totten trust designation against the surviving spouse.

## Decision

- The Nevada Supreme Court reversed the district court.
- The court held Totten trusts are valid and enforceable under Nevada law.
- The court held the NSLA account, as re-titled and documented, constituted a valid Totten trust for Susan that was not revoked before Thomas’s death.
- The court remanded for disposition of the account consistent with the Totten trust, subject to any applicable community-property rights of Irene.

## Legal Principles

- A deposit account titled “as trustee for” a named beneficiary may create a valid Totten (tentative) trust, where the depositor retains control and a power of revocation during life and the remaining balance is payable to the beneficiary at death.
- A valid Totten trust operates as a trust-based, non-probate transfer and is not treated as an attempted will; it therefore need not satisfy will-execution formalities.
- Recognizing a Totten trust does not, by itself, constitute a revocation of a prior will; the will governs probate assets, while the Totten trust passes outside probate.
- A Totten trust funded with community property is effective only to the extent consistent with the surviving spouse’s community-property share.

## Conclusion

The court recognized Totten trusts as enforceable in Nevada, treated the “as trustee for” account designation as a valid revocable savings trust rather than an invalid testamentary act, and directed that the account proceeds pass to the named beneficiary at death subject to the surviving spouse’s community-property rights.


Byrd v. Lanahan, 105 Nev. 707, 783 P.2d 426 (Nev. 1989)