## Facts

- Robert W. Hocks gave his sister, Joanne Jeremiah, two envelopes containing four $5,000 bearer bonds, stating he wanted to give them to her and intended to give more.
- Hocks said the bonds were for Jeremiah because of love, gratitude for her care of their mother, and to fulfill a promise to their mother.
- The same day, Hocks and Jeremiah jointly rented a safe deposit box; both signed the signature card and each kept a key. Hocks paid the rent.
- Hocks later placed additional bearer bonds and a diamond into the box, telling Jeremiah the added items were for her.
- Jeremiah never accessed the box during Hocks’s lifetime; Hocks periodically accessed it to add items and to remove bond coupons, collecting the interest himself.
- At Jeremiah’s request to document ownership, Hocks placed handwritten notes in the box stating the bonds and diamond were Jeremiah’s and describing the gifts as “complete and irrevocable” when signed, while also referring to Jeremiah’s ownership upon his death.
- After Hocks died, Jeremiah accessed the box and removed the bonds and diamond.
- Hocks’s widow, Ruth C. Hocks, individually and as personal representative, claimed the bonds and diamond belonged to the estate and sued for replevin and conversion; Jeremiah asserted an affirmative defense of inter vivos gift.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence permitted a finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that Hocks made a valid inter vivos gift of bearer bonds and a diamond to Jeremiah.
2. Whether joint access to the safe deposit box, Hocks’s payment of box rent, and his collection of interest negated delivery or relinquishment of dominion and control.
3. Whether Hocks’s notes referencing ownership “upon his death” made the transfer testamentary rather than an inter vivos gift.

## Decision

- The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Jeremiah.
- The court held the record allowed the trier of fact to find, by clear and convincing evidence, donative intent, delivery, acceptance, and sufficient surrender of dominion and control.
- Physical delivery occurred when Hocks handed Jeremiah the bonds and stated they were a gift; later placement in a jointly rented box did not negate that delivery.
- Hocks’s continued access, rent payments, and coupon clipping were not inconsistent with a completed gift under the circumstances.
- The notes were permissibly read as confirming a present, completed, irrevocable gift, not as postponing transfer until death.
- On review of this action at law, the court did not reweigh evidence and considered whether a rational factfinder could reach the result on the clear-and-convincing standard.

## Legal Principles

- A party asserting an inter vivos gift must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) present donative intent, (2) delivery (actual or constructive), (3) acceptance, and (4) surrender of dominion and control.
- Manual transfer of property coupled with statements of present donative intent can satisfy delivery even if the donor later shares access to the storage location.
- A donor’s continued practical involvement with gifted property (e.g., shared access, paying storage costs, collecting income) does not necessarily defeat a gift when the factfinder can reasonably infer that ownership was nonetheless transferred.
- Writings referencing post-death ownership do not automatically make a transfer testamentary when the overall context supports a present, irrevocable gift.
- In actions at law, appellate review focuses on whether the evidence could support the trial court’s finding under the applicable burden, not on independent factfinding.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the finding that Hocks made completed inter vivos gifts of bearer bonds and a diamond to his sister, and that his retained access to a jointly rented safe deposit box and collection of interest did not, on this record, negate delivery or a sufficient relinquishment of ownership.


Hocks v. Jeremiah, 92 Or. App. 549, 759 P.2d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 1988)