## Facts

- Joseph Damato, domiciled in Paterson, New Jersey, maintained business interests in Florida and died on November 6, 1960.
- In 1957, Joseph opened two savings accounts at a Florida bank titled in his name “in trust for” his son Philip:
  - Account No. 9503 (opened Feb. 7, 1957) with a death balance of $11,165.84.
  - Account No. 11141 (opened Sept. 24, 1957) with a death balance of $5,684.26.
- Funding for the first account largely originated from Joseph’s New Jersey business account; the second account was funded by a transfer from Joseph’s Florida “Racing Account.”
- Joseph retained the passbooks, made deposits and withdrawals (including a $5,000 withdrawal from the second account in 1959), and otherwise controlled the accounts during his lifetime.
- Philip did not know the accounts existed until after Joseph’s death.
- Joseph’s will was probated in New Jersey; James Damato (another son) qualified as executor.
- The executor sought instructions in the New Jersey Probate Division regarding disposition of the Florida account balances.
- The Probate Division applied Florida substantive law, treated the accounts as Totten trusts, and awarded the balances to Philip; the executor appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the court could take judicial notice of Florida law governing the accounts despite the absence of formal pleading or evidentiary proof of that law.
2. Whether New Jersey should apply Florida’s internal substantive law or Florida’s conflict-of-laws rules (renvoi) to determine ownership of Florida “in trust for” savings accounts owned by a New Jersey decedent.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment awarding both account balances to Philip.
- The court held the trial judge properly took judicial notice of Florida law because the parties proceeded on the assumption Florida law applied and no unfair surprise or prejudice resulted.
- The court applied Florida’s internal substantive law to the accounts as property situated in Florida.
- The court rejected renvoi and declined to apply Florida’s conflict-of-laws rules.
- Under Florida’s recognition of Totten trusts, the accounts were effective to pass the remaining balances to Philip at Joseph’s death.

## Legal Principles

- A forum court may ascertain and apply another state’s law by judicial notice where the parties rely on that law and the procedure causes no unfair surprise or prejudice.
- For savings accounts opened and maintained in another state in the depositor’s name “in trust for” another, the law of the account’s situs governs validity and dispositive effect.
- When a forum selects a foreign jurisdiction’s law under its choice-of-law rules, it ordinarily applies that jurisdiction’s internal substantive law, not its conflict-of-laws rules; renvoi is generally disfavored.
- A Totten trust is a revocable, tentative trust created by an “in trust for” deposit; if not revoked, the remaining balance passes to the named beneficiary upon the depositor’s death outside the probate estate.

## Conclusion

The court held that Florida law governed Florida “in trust for” accounts owned by a New Jersey decedent, permitted judicial notice of Florida law, rejected renvoi, and upheld the accounts as Totten trusts transferring the remaining balances to the named beneficiary at death.


In re Estate of Damato, 86 N.J. Super. 107, 206 A.2d 171 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1965)