In re Totten, 179 N.Y. 112, 71 N.E. 748 (N.Y. 1904)
In re Estate of Totten is a foundational decision in American trusts and estates law. The New York Court of Appeals confronted a recurring practical problem: when someone deposits money in a savings account in their own name "as trustee for" another person, has that depositor created a valid present trust, or is the arrangement merely an invalid attempt to make a will without complying with testamentary formalities?
Does a savings bank deposit made by a person in his own name "as trustee for" another create a valid, enforceable trust interest in the named beneficiary that becomes effective at the depositor's death without compliance with testamentary formalities, or is it merely an invalid attempt at a testamentary disposition?
A deposit by one person of his own money in a savings bank account in his name as trustee for another constitutes a tentative (or "Totten") trust. It is revocable at will by the depositor during his lifetime—by withdrawal of funds, by closing or altering the account, by other unequivocal acts or declarations of disaffirmance, or by a testamentary provision inconsistent with the trust. If the depositor dies without having revoked the arrangement, the trust becomes absolute as to the balance remaining on deposit at death, and the named beneficiary is entitled to that balance.
The Court of Appeals held that a deposit of the form "A, as trustee for B" creates a revocable, tentative trust during the depositor's lifetime that becomes absolute upon the depositor's death if not revoked. Accordingly, the named beneficiaries were entitled to the balances remaining in the accounts at the depositor's death.
In re Estate of Totten is the origin of the "Totten trust" or payable-on-death (POD) account—a ubiquitous nonprobate transfer device. Law students study Totten to understand how courts mediate between strict formalities and practical estate planning, how intent is inferred from objective manifestations (like account titling), and how revocable inter vivos arrangements can avoid probate without violating the Statute of Wills. The decision launched a doctrine later codified or endorsed in many jurisdictions and integrated into modern statutes governing nonprobate transfers, such as payable-on-death designations and multiple-party accounts. It remains central to issues of creation, revocation, creditor access, and the interaction between trusts and wills.