ÿWPC» …# VUNa %¯ 0GµU:üw@6 4v Š ™ B¡ ã 0Jë 0T5 0^‰ 0hç 0rO 0|Á 0†= 0à 1uS 0dÈ U>,U*jB)”DC½ B AMèjv~RvÓÐ D3£ 0@Ö AOÆe 0D+ D/o Bž˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX('\$¡¡Ô€XåÙXXMXÔ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ˜E™šE›œEžEŸ Ó€¬ÍD0"`°L3|x¬C:\WPWIN60\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÞÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€!ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òMay€15,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€"ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€XXdædÈ7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌÌÌBRANDY€REBECCA€THATCHER,à à)€Ìa€minor€by€next€friend,€KATHY€VANà à)ÌSTORY,à àà àà àà àà à)€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àò ò)€€œHaywood›€Chancery€No.€10975̜ـ€ÙßR€&'$A1-j|›³` Å `€€@ÿRß›à àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Appeal€No.€œ02A01›„9605„CH„00114Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌBOBBY€PHILLIP€WYATT,€ROBERTà à)ÌPHILLIP€WYATT€and€WILLIAM€LEA,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óDefendants/Appellees.à àò ò)ó óÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€œHAYWOOD›€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€BROWNSVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€GEORGE€R.€ELLIS,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òLEWIS€L.€COBBÌJUSTIN€S.€œGILBERTÌSPRAGINS,€BARNETT,€COBB€&€BUTLER›Ìó óJackson,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€AppellantsÌÌò òPAT€H.€MANN,€JR.Ìó óBrownsville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppelleesÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òREVERSEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ÌÌHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌœÓÓó óà àIn€this€breach€of€contract€case,€Kathy€Van€Story€(ð ðPlaintiffðð),€as€the€next€friend€ofÏÑ7€XXdæXXdæ7ÑBrandy€Thatcher€(ð ðBrandyðð),€seeks€a€judgment€declaring€that€the€proceeds€of€JanieÏPerry€Thatcher€Wyattððs€(ð ðDecedentðð)€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€be€held€in€trustÏfor€the€benefit€of€Brandy.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€the€proceeds€of€Decedentððs€lifeÏinsurance€policy€be€held€in€trust€until€Brandy€reaches€age€twenty„five€or€until€BrandyÏhas€completed€her€desired€college,€graduate€and€medical€school€education,Ïwhichever€is€later,€and€further€ordered€that€any€remaining€monies€be€distributedÏbetween€Brandy€and€Bobby€Wyatt€(ð ðDefendantðð).€€Plaintiff€appeals€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court€arguing€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€granting€Defendant€a€one„half€interest€inÏthe€trust€following€the€latter€of€Brandyððs€twenty„fifth€birthday€or€desired€college,Ïgraduate€and€medical€school€education€asserting€that€it€was€the€Decedentððs€intent€thatÏthe€entire€trust€be€used€for€the€benefit€of€Brandy.€€For€the€reasons€stated€hereafter,€weÏreverse€the€judgment€of€the€court€below.ÌÌà@ àò òFACTSó óÌÌà à€In€1986,€Decedent€married€Defendant.€€Decedent€had€one€child€from€aÏprevious€marriage,€Brandy.€€Defendant€had€two€children€from€a€previous€marriage,ÏRobert€Phillip€Wyatt€(ð ðPhillipðð)€and€Terry€Ralph€Wyatt€€(ð ðTerryðð).€€No€children€were€bornÏof€the€marriage€between€Decedent€and€Defendant.€€ÌÌà àIn€1988,€Decedent€developed€uterine€cancer.€€After€undergoing€treatment€forÏher€cancer,€Decedentððs€cancer€remained€in€remission€for€almost€five€years.€€In€OctoberÏ1992,€Decedent€began€experiencing€problems€with€her€lungs.€€Upon€visiting€herÏphysician,€Decedent€was€initially€diagnosed€as€having€pneumonia.€However,€inÏJanuary€1993,€Decedent€was€correctly€diagnosed€as€having€lung€cancer.€€On€MarchÏ18,€1994,€Decedent€died.€ÌÌà àBefore€her€death,€Decedent€executed€a€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy,Ïnaming€Defendant€as€the€beneficiary.€€According€to€the€testimony€of€the€Plaintiff,ÏDecedentððs€sister,€in€December€1993€Decedent€instructed€both€the€Plaintiff€andÏDefendant€to€hold€the€proceeds€of€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€inÏtrust€for€the€education,€care€and€future€of€Brandy.€€Plaintiff€and€Defendant€were€to€actÏas€co„trustees€and€were€not€to€extract€money€from€the€trust€without€the€signatures€ofÏboth€parties.€€Plaintiff€and€Defendant€agreed€to€create€a€trust€from€the€proceeds€ofÏDecedentððs€life€insurance€policy€and€to€act€as€co„trustees€of€the€trust€for€Brandy.€ÌÌà àDefendant,€however,€denied€that€the€Decedent€requested€that€he€and€PlaintiffÍform€a€trust€for€the€care€and€education€of€Brandy€out€of€the€proceeds€of€DecedentððsÏ$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy.€€Instead,€Defendant€testified€that€Decedent€onlyÏasked€him€to€€take€care€of€Brandy€after€she€died,€and€he€agreed€that€he€would€takeÏcare€of€Brandy€to€the€best€of€his€ability.€ÌÌà àSubstantiating€Plaintiffððs€testimony€that€a€trust€was€to€be€created€for€Brandy€fromÏthe€proceeds€of€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy,€Phyllis€Presley,ÏDecedentððs€sister,€testified€that€Decedent€said€on€several€occasions€that€the€proceedsÏfrom€her€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€were€to€be€held€in€trust€for€Brandy€and€thatÏPlaintiff€and€Defendant€were€to€act€as€co„trustees€of€this€money.€€Presley€further€statedÏthat€the€money€was€to€be€used€by€no€one€other€than€Brandy.€ÌÌà àMoreover,€the€Decedentððs€aunt,€Floye€Cobb€(ð ðCobbðð),€testified€that€DecedentÏexecuted€a€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€for€the€benefit€of€Brandy€while€DecedentÏwas€married€to€her€previous€husband,€Ron€Thatcher.€€€After€Ron€and€DecedentÏdivorced€but€before€Decedent€married€Defendant,€Decedent€executed€anotherÏ$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€making€Cobb€the€beneficiary€and€instructing€Cobb€toÏuse€the€proceeds€to€take€care€of€Brandy.€Following€her€marriage€to€Defendant,ÏDecedent€changed€the€beneficiary€on€her€life€insurance€policy€from€Cobb€toÏDefendant€and€instructed€Defendant€that€he€and€the€Plaintiff€were€to€act€as€co„trusteesÏof€the€proceeds€of€the€policy€which€were€to€be€used€for€the€care€and€education€ofÏBrandy.€Furthermore,€Cobb€testified€that€Decedent€repeatedly€stated€that€the€proceedsÏfrom€her€$100,000.00€insurance€policy€were€to€be€used€solely€for€the€benefit€ofÍBrandy.€ÌÌà àDecedentððs€sister,€Sherry€Van€Story€(ð ðSherryðð),€testified€that€Decedent€told€herÏon€several€occasions€that€€Plaintiff€and€Defendant€had€agreed€to€act€as€joint€trustees€ofÏthe€proceeds€from€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy.€€Sherry€stated€thatÏthe€life€insurance€proceeds€were€to€be€used€to€pay€Decedentððs€medical€bills,€theÏmortgage€on€Defendantððs€house€if€Brandy€continued€to€live€with€Defendant€afterÏDecedentððs€death,€Brandyððs€college€education€and€Brandyððs€future€living€expenses.€ÌÌà àKim€Evans,€the€Decedentððs€first€cousin,€testified€that€Decedent€told€her€that€theÏproceeds€from€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€were€to€be€used€forÏBrandyððs€college€education€and€that€Plaintiff€and€Defendant€were€to€act€as€co„trustees.€ÌÌà àBrandy€testified€that€her€mother,€the€Decedent,€had€repeatedly€stated€to€her€€thatÏshe€had€the€cost€of€Brandyððs€medical€school€ð ðcovered.ðð€ÌÌà àCharlotte€Wright,€a€co„worker€and€friend€of€the€Decedent,€testified€that€theÏproceeds€from€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€were€to€be€used€forÏBrandyððs€college€education.€ÌÌà àPhillip€Wyatt,€his€wife€Stephanie€Wyatt€and€Terry€Wyatt€all€testified€that€€they€hadÏnever€heard€the€Decedent€refer€to€a€trust€which€was€to€be€created€for€the€benefit€ofÏBrandy.€ÌÌà àNonetheless,€in€May€1994€after€Decedentððs€death,€Defendant€collected€theÏ$100,000.00€in€life€insurance€proceeds,€purchased€a€$50,000.00€certificate€of€depositÏand€placed€the€other€$50,000.00€into€an€investment€account.€€Without€conferring€withÏthe€Plaintiff,€Defendant€placed€the€certificate€of€deposit€and€the€investment€accountÏunder€the€name€of€the€ð ðBrandy€Thatcher€Trust.ðð€€However,€instead€of€acting€as€the€co„trustee€along€with€the€Plaintiff,€Defendant€employed€William€Lea€to€act€as€trustee€andÏmade€the€trust€a€revocable€trust.€€Defendant€structured€the€trust€so€that€it€wouldÏterminate€when€Brandy€reached€age€twenty„five.€€The€trust€was€then€to€be€distributedÏequally€between€Brandy€and€Defendantððs€two€sons,€Phillip€Wyatt€and€Terry€Wyatt.€ÌÌà àIn€the€summer€of€1994,€Brandy€moved€out€of€Defendantððs€house€and€beganÏliving€with€the€Plaintiff.€€€In€July€1994,€two€days€after€Brandyððs€move€from€DefendantððsÏhouse€to€Plaintiffððs€house,€Defendant€instructed€William€Lea€to€terminate€the€trust€thatÏhe€had€created€for€Brandy€and€to€place€the€proceeds€in€an€account€under€the€name€ofÏhis€son,€Phillip€Wyatt.€ÌÌà@ àò òLAWó óÌà àÌà àThe€sole€issue€before€this€Court€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€theÏDefendant,€Defendant€Wyatt,€a€one„half€interest€in€the€remaining€proceeds€ofÏDecedentððs€€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€following€the€latter€of€Brandyððs€twenty„fifth€birthday€or€the€date€at€which€Brandy€completes€her€desired€graduate€schoolÍeducation.ÌÌà àAs€a€tool€of€equity,€a€resulting€trust€will€be€imposed€when€necessary€to€prevent€aÏfailure€of€justice.€€òòBurleson€v.€McCraryóó,€753€S.W.2d€349,€352€(Tenn.€1988);€òòEstate€ofÏWardell€ex€rel.€Wardell€v.€Daileyóó,€674€S.W.2d€293,€295€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983),€quotingÏ76€Am.Jur.2dòò€Trustsóó€ðð€196€(1975).€€Such€trusts€are€ð ðjudge„created€trusts€or€doctrinesÏwhich€enable€a€court,€without€violating€all€rules€of€logic,€to€reach€an€interest€in€propertyÏbelonging€to€one€person€yet€titled€in€and€held€by€another."òò€Wells€v.€Wellsóó,€556€S.W.2dÏ769,€771€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1977).€€A€resulting€trust€is€defined€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[b]roadly€speaking,€a€resulting€trust€arises€from€the€nature€ofÏcircumstances€of€consideration€involved€in€a€transactionÏwhereby€one€person€thereby€becomes€invested€with€a€legalÏtitle€but€is€obligated€in€equity€to€hold€his€legal€title€for€theÏbenefit€of€another,€the€intention€of€the€former€to€hold€in€trustÏfor€the€latter€being€implied€or€presumed€as€a€matter€of€law,Ïalthough€no€intention€to€create€or€hold€in€trust€has€beenÏmanifested,€expressly€or€by€inference,€and€although€there€isÏan€absence€of€fraud€or€constructive€fraud.€€ÌÌÓÓòòIn€Re€Estate€of€Roark€v.€Bischoffóó,€829€S.W.2d€688,€692€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991),€quotingÏ76€Am.Jur.2d,€òòTrustsóó,€ðð€196,€p.€429€(1975).ÌÌà àThe€equitable€power€to€establish€a€resulting€trust€applies€with€respect€to€bothÏreal€and€personal€property.€€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Roarkóó,€829€S.W.2d€at€693,òò€óóciting€89€C.J.S.ÏòòTrustóó€ðð€98€p.€941€(1955).€€òòSee€alsoóó,€òòDaileyóó,€674€S.W.2d€at€295;€23€A.L.R.€p.€1500.€€InÏeither€case,€"[i]t€is€.€.€.€uniformly€held€that€resulting€trusts€may€be,€and€generally€are,Ïproved€by€parol€evidence."€€òòChappell€v.€Dawsonóó,€308€S.W.2d€420,€422€(Tenn.€1957).€ÏòòSee€alsoóó,€òòButler€v.€Rutledgeóó,€42€Tenn.€(2€Cold.)€4€(1865);€òòSavageóó,€4€Tenn.€App.€at€283;ÍòòSee€generallyóó,€89€C.J.S.€òòTrustsóó€Sec.€101,€133€(1955);€Gibson's€Suits€in€Chancery,€ððÏ976,€n.€2€(5th€Ed.1956).€€In€addition,€it€is€also€uniformly€held€that€any€oral€statementÏpurporting€to€create€a€resulting€trust€in€property€must€have€been€made€prior€to€orÏcontemporaneously€with€the€transaction.€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Roarkóó,€829€S.W.2d€at€692.€ÌÌà àHowever,€when€one€attempts€to€create€a€resulting€trust€on€the€basis€of€parolÏevidence,€proof€of€an€oral€trust€must€be€established€by€clear,€cogent€and€convincingÏevidence.€€òòKing€v.€Warrenóó,€680€S.W.2d€459,€460€(Tenn.€1984);€òòAllen€v.€National€BankÏof€Newportóó,€839€S.W.2d€763,€765€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Roarkóó,€829ÏS.W.2d€at€693;€òòAl„Haddad€v.€Al„Haddadóó,€774€S.W.2d€192€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).ÌÌà àIn€addressing€the€requirements€necessary€for€the€creation€of€an€oral€resultingÏtrust,€the€court€in€òòKing€v.€Warrenóó,€680€S.W.2d€459€(Tenn.€1984),€stated€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[w]e€recently€had€occasion€to€discuss€the€law€with€respect€toÏthe€establishment€of€an€oral€trust€in€real€estate,€affirming€theÏrequisites€that€the€declaration€must€be€made€prior€to€orÏcontemporaneous€with€a€transfer€of€realty,€must€be€provenÏby€evidence€that€is€clear,€cogent€and€convincing,€and€thatÏordinarily,€the€testimony€of€a€single,€interested€witnessÏwould€not€be€sufficient€to€establish€a€trust€by€that€quantumÏof€proof.€€òòTansil€v.€Tansilóó,€673€S.W.2d€131€(Tenn.1984);€Ïciting€e.g.,€òòSanderson€v.€Milliganóó,€585€S.W.2d€573Ï(Tenn.1979)€and€òòHunt€v.€Huntóó,€169€Tenn.€1,€80€S.W.2d€666Ï(1935).€€ÌÌòòKingóó,€€680€S.W.2d€at€461.ÌÌÓÓà àSimilarly,€the€court€in€òòLinder€v.€Littleóó,€490€S.W.2d€717€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1972),Ïaddressed€the€creation€of€an€oral€trust€and€stated€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àthe€declaration€of€trust€by€the€grantor€must€be€before€orÍcontemporaneous€with€the€conveyance.€€òòAdrian€v.€Brownóó,Ï29€Tenn.App.€236,€196€S.W.2d€118€(1946).€€And,€proof€of€aÏparol€trust€must€be€of€the€clearest€and€most€convincingÏcharacter.€€It€must€be€so€clear,€cogent€and€convincing€as€toÏovercome€the€opposing€evidence€coupled€with€theÏpresumption€that€obtains€in€favor€of€the€written€instrument.€ÏòòHoffner€v.€Hoffneróó,€32€Tenn.App.€98,€221€S.W.2d€907€(1949)Ïand€authorities€cited€therein.€€ÌÌ€òòLinderóó,€490€S.W.2d€at€723.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà à€Resulting€trusts€generally€are€imposed€in€accordance€with€€the€actual€orÏassumed€intention€of€the€parties.€òòBurlesonóó,€753€S.W.2d€at€352„53;€òòSee€generallyóó,ÏGibsonððs€Suits€in€Chancery€ðð€382€(1982).€€One€instance€where€resulting€trusts€areÏimposed€occurs€in€a€situation€when€the€owner€of€property€gratuitously€transfers€it€andÏproperly€manifests€an€intention€that€the€transferee€should€hold€the€property€in€trust,€butÏthe€trust,€for€some€reason,€fails.€€òòBurlesonóó,€753€S.W.2d€at€353;€òòSeeóó,€RestatementÏ(Second)€of€Trusts€ðð€411€(1959);€G.€Bogert€òòTrusts€and€Trusteesóó€ðð€468€(1977).€€ÌÌà àIn€discussing€the€varying€situations€in€which€a€resulting€trust€may€be€imposed,Ïthis€Court€stated€in€òòEstate€of€Wardell€ex€rel.€Wardell€v.€Daileyóó,€674€S.W.2d€293,€295Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983),€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[t]he€resulting€trust€may€be€created€in€a€variety€of€situations,Ïfor€example€"[w]here€a€deed€by€father€to€son€is€shown€to€beÏfor€the€benefit€of€the€mother."€€Gibson's€Suits€in€Chancery,€ððÏ976,€n.€2€(5th€Ed.1956).€€This€court,€more€than€fifty€yearsÏago,€in€òòSavage€v.€Savageóó,€4€Tenn.App.€277€(1927),Ïconfronted€a€somewhat€similar€situation.€€There,€the€plaintiff,Ïafter€purchasing€a€lot€with€a€house€on€it,€had€conveyed€theÏsame€to€his€father€to€be€held€in€trust€for€the€former€and€otherÏthird€persons,€while€the€former€went€"north,€[to]€work€whereÍhe€could€get€better€wages"€in€order€to€pay€off€the€notes€onÏthe€land.€€òòIdóó.€at€279.€€While€the€plaintiff/son€was€absent,€theÏfather€remarried€and€later€died,€after€which€the€widowÏclaimed€the€land.€€In€establishing€a€resulting€trust€in€favor€ofÏthe€son,€the€court€stated€that€"[w]hen€property€is€conveyedÏor€given€by€one€person€to€another,€to€hold€for€the€use€of€aÏthird€person,€such€a€trust€will€thereby€be€created€as€will€giveÏequity€jurisdiction€to€compel€the€application€to€the€purposesÏof€the€trust."€€€òòIdóó.€at€284.ÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòEstate€of€Wardell€ex€rel.€Wardell€v.€Daileyóó,€674€S.W.2d€293,€295€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1983),€a€wife€requested€that€her€name€be€removed€from€her€joint€checking€andÏsavings€account€which€she€had€established€with€her€husband€due€to€her€blindnessÏand€inability€to€oversee€her€financial€affairs.€€òòIdóó.€at€296.€€Upon€removal€of€the€wifeððsÏname€from€her€joint€checking€and€savings€accounts,€her›€sonððs€name€was€addedÏinstead.€€Husband€thereafter€had€the€name€of€his€son€placed€jointly€with€him€onÏvirtually€all€of€his€certificates€of€deposit€and€money€market€certificates,€which€resultedÏin€the€son€being€the€joint€owner€of€€most€of€his€parentððs€estate€at€the€time€of€his€fatherððsÏdeath.€€òòIdóó.€€After€the€fatherððs€death,€son€claimed€to€be€the€sole€owner€of€the€jointÏchecking€and€savings€accounts,€certificates€of€deposit€and€money€market€certificates.€ÏòòIdóó.€€The€court,€however,€imposed€a€resulting€trust€on€the€joint€and€survivorship€bankÏaccounts€and€certificates€of€deposit€and€required€the€son€to€hold€the€money€in€trust€forÏthe€lifetime€of€his€mother€and€thereafter€required€the€son€to€œdivide€the›€corpus€of€theÏtrust€with€his€sister€at€his€motherððs€death.€€òòIdóó.€at€297.ÌÌà àIn€òòBurleson€v.€McCraryóó,€753€S.W.2d€349€(Tenn.€1988),€Mr.€Burleson€gratuitouslyÏtransferred€his€residence€to€one€of€his€daughters€and€manifested€an€intention€that€theÏdaughter€hold€the€property€in€trust€for€the€benefit€of€all€five€children€of€Mr.€Burleson.€ÍAlthough€the€daughter€claimed€that€she€owned€the€property€in€fee€simple€absoluteÏbecause€the€property€had€been€properly€deeded€and€recorded€in€her€name,€the€courtÏheld€that€the€daughter€held€the€property€in€trust€for€the€benefit€of€all€five€children€of€Mr.ÏBurleson.€€òòIdóó.€at€353.€€The€court,€therefore,€imposed€a€resulting€trust€upon€the€granteeÏdaughter€and€directed€her€to€reconvey€the€property€to€the€executor€of€Mr.€BurlesonððsÏestate.€€òòIdóó.ÌÌà àMoreover,€in€the€case€of€òòCook€v.€Cookóó,€559€S.W.2d€329,€332€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1977),€this€œCourt›€œwas€faced€with€a€situation›€similar€to€the€case€at€bar.€œ€In›€òòCookóó,€theÏdecedent€designated€his€brother€as€the€beneficiary€of€his€life€insurance€policy€butÏorally€instructed€his€brother€to€pay€decedentððs€debts,€to€set€decedentððs€step„son€up€in€aÏfarming€operation€and€to€use€the€remaining€proceeds€for€the€benefit€of€decedentððs€son.€ÏòòIdóó.€œ€In›€accordance€with€the€decedentððs€intentions,€this€Court€held€that€the€decedentððsÏbrother€was€the€trustee€of€the€proceeds€from€decedentððs€life€insurance€policy€and€thatÏthe€proceeds€of€the€trust€were€to€€be€used€to€pay€decedentððs€debts,€to€set€theÏdecedentððs€step„son€up€in€a€farming€operation€and€to€use€the€remaining€proceeds€forÏthe€benefit€of€decedentððs€son.€€òòIdóó.€at€333.€€In€holding€that€an€oral€trust€had€beenÏcreated,€this€Court€stated€that€it€is€important€to€take€note€of€the€relationship€betweenÏthe€parties€to€the€trust€agreement€and€to€weigh€the€reasonableness€of€the€terms€of€theÏtrust€as€orally€related.€€òòCook€v.€Cookóó,€559€S.W.2d€329,€332€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1977).€€ÌÌà àThe€record€establishes€that€Decedent€and€Brandy€enjoyed€a€close€œrelationship.›€ÏAs€the€only€natural€child€of€the€Decedent,€it€is€reasonable€to€believe€that€DecedentÍwanted€to€ensure€that€Brandy€was€properly€provided€for€after€Decedentððs€death.€€Thus,Ïupon€our€review€of€the€record,€the€clear,€cogent€and€convincing€evidence€reveals€thatÏthe€Decedent€named€Defendant€as€the€legal€beneficiary€of€her€$100,000.00€lifeÏinsurance€policy,€but€Decedent€impressed€an€oral€trust€upon€the€proceeds€of€herÏinsurance€policy€by€instructing€the€Plaintiff€and€Defendant€to€create€a€trust€for€theÏbenefit€of€Brandy€from€these€proceeds€and€to€act€as€co„trustees€of€the€trust.€€€We,Ïtherefore,€hold€that€the€proceeds€of€Decedentððs€$100,000.00€life€insurance€policy€beÏheld€in€trust€for€the€benefit€of€Brandy.€œ›œ€We€further€hold€that€the€Plaintiff,€Kathy€VanÏStory,€is€hereby€appointed€as€trustee€of€the€trust.›ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€hereby€reversed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€œtoÏthe›€œappellees›€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€œnecessary.ÌÓÓÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌLILLARD,€J.›