## Facts

- Before marriage, the husband wrote the wife a letter stating he would be “extremely happy” for her to “accept” listed items of his premarital personal property “so that in the event of my death all of this will belong to you.”
- The attached schedule listed, among other items, a Louisiana house interest, stock, and bank accounts/funds.
- The parties married; the wife visited the Louisiana house once and never received a deed or other title document.
- The wife never possessed or controlled the referenced stock certificates or bank accounts.
- After marriage, the husband sold/liquidated the Louisiana property and certain securities and withdrew funds from the accounts.
- A Texas residence was purchased during the marriage; about 69% of its down payment was traceable to proceeds from the Louisiana house, stocks, and accounts listed in the letter, with the remainder not traced.
- In the divorce, the trial court found the husband had made a premarital gift of the Louisiana house, stocks, and account funds and, based on tracing, awarded the Texas residence to the wife as her separate property.
- The husband appealed, challenging the legal sufficiency of evidence of a completed gift, particularly delivery.

## Issues

1. Whether the husband’s premarital letter and attached schedule constituted a valid inter vivos gift of the listed assets to the wife.
2. Whether the evidence established the required present donative intent and delivery to complete a gift, supporting characterization of the Texas residence as the wife’s separate property by tracing.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the portion of the divorce decree awarding the Texas residence to the wife as separate property on a gift theory.
- The court rendered judgment that the alleged premarital inter vivos gift was ineffective.
- The court concluded the letter’s “in the event of my death” language showed no present intent to transfer title immediately.
- The court held there was no legally sufficient evidence of delivery of the Louisiana real property, the stock, or the bank accounts/funds.

## Legal Principles

- A valid inter vivos gift requires (1) donative intent to make a present transfer, (2) delivery of the property or an instrument evidencing transfer of title, and (3) acceptance.
- Donative intent must contemplate that title passes immediately; language conditioning ownership on the donor’s death indicates a testamentary intent, not a present gift.
- Delivery is indispensable; without a deed (for real property) or transfer of dominion/control or an appropriate transfer instrument (for stock and accounts), a gift is not completed.
- Property acquired during marriage is presumptively community property; a spouse claiming separate property by tracing must first prove valid separate ownership of the source assets.

## Conclusion

The court held that a premarital letter expressing that the wife would receive listed assets “in the event of [the husband’s] death,” without any delivery or transfer of control, did not create a completed inter vivos gift; therefore, proceeds used to buy the marital Texas residence could not be treated as tracing to the wife’s separate estate, and the separate-property award of the home was reversed and judgment rendered rejecting the gift theory.


Grimsley v. Grimsley, 632 S.W.2d 174 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1982)