## Facts

- A husband and wife, domiciled in Ohio, owned real property in Tennessee as tenants by the entirety under Tennessee law.
- The spouses sold the Tennessee real estate and received proceeds from the sale.
- Under Tennessee law, when spouses hold real estate by the entirety, the tenancy continues in the proceeds from a sale of the real estate.
- The husband later died while domiciled in Ohio.
- The surviving spouse filed an Ohio action seeking a declaration that her deceased husband’s interest in the sale proceeds passed directly to her by survivorship, consistent with Tennessee’s treatment of entireties proceeds.
- The executor of the decedent’s estate and a co-trustee opposed the claim, arguing that the proceeds were personal property and that Ohio law governed succession because the decedent was domiciled in Ohio at death.
- The estate parties also argued that Ohio does not recognize tenancy by the entirety in personal property and, therefore, the proceeds could not pass outside the estate by an entireties survivorship theory.
- Both sides moved for summary judgment.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the surviving spouse.
- The executor and co-trustee appealed.

## Issues

1. For succession purposes, should an Ohio court treat proceeds from the sale of Tennessee real property as a movable governed by the law of the decedent’s domicile (Ohio), rather than apply Tennessee’s rule that an entireties tenancy continues in the proceeds?
2. If Ohio law governs, can the surviving spouse take the proceeds by survivorship based on tenancy by the entirety, or are the proceeds an asset of the decedent’s estate?

## Decision

- The court of appeals characterized the dispute as one concerning succession to a movable: the cash proceeds from the sale of the Tennessee property.
- Applying Ohio conflict-of-laws rules (consistent with the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws approach to movables), the court held that succession to movables is governed by the law of the decedent’s domicile at death—here, Ohio.
- Under Ohio law, the proceeds were personal property and could not be held as tenants by the entirety.
- Because Ohio does not recognize tenancy by the entirety in personalty, the surviving spouse was not entitled to take the proceeds by survivorship outside the estate.
- The appellate court reversed the trial court’s summary judgment for the surviving spouse and remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- In Ohio conflicts doctrine, succession to movables is generally governed by the law of the decedent’s domicile at death.
- Cash proceeds from the sale of real property are treated as personal property (movables) for succession analysis.
- The law of the situs state controls interests in land while it remains real property, but once converted to proceeds, succession to those proceeds is evaluated under rules applicable to movables.
- If the governing domicile law does not recognize tenancy by the entirety in personal property, sale proceeds cannot pass to a surviving spouse by an entireties survivorship theory and may be administered as part of the decedent’s estate.

## Conclusion

Reif v. Reif, 86 Ohio App.3d 804, 621 N.E.2d 1279 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1993), held that an Ohio court should treat proceeds from the sale of Tennessee entireties real estate as movables and apply Ohio (the decedent’s domicile) law to determine succession; because Ohio does not recognize tenancy by the entirety in personal property, the proceeds did not pass to the widow by survivorship, and the summary judgment for the widow was reversed and the case remanded.


Reif v. Reif, 621 N.E.2d 1279 (1993)