A. A provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy, contract of employment, bond, mortgage, promissory note, certificated or uncertificated security, account agreement, custodial agreement, deposit agreement, compensation plan, pension plan, individual retirement plan, employee benefit plan, trust, conveyance, deed of gift, marital property agreement or other written instrument of a similar nature is nontestamentary.
B. A written instrument is nontestamentary if it contains a provision that:
1. Money or other benefits due to, controlled by or owned by a decedent before death shall be paid after the decedent's death to a person whom the decedent designates either in the instrument or in a separate writing, including a will, executed either before or at the same time as the instrument, or later.
2. Money due or to become due under the written instrument ceases to be payable in the event of death of the promisee or the promisor before payment or demand.
3. Any property that is controlled by or owned by the decedent before death and that is the subject of the written instrument passes to a person the decedent designates either in the written instrument or in a separate writing, including a will, executed either before or at the same time as the instrument or later.
C. This section does not limit rights of creditors under other laws of this state.
Notes of Decisions
Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Craig, 26 P.3d 510 (Ariz. 2001).
· cites it 8× “R.S. § 14-6101(A) (1995). Diane’s estate would have us conclude that because this statute operates to define insurance policies as nontestamentary, such designation prohibits us from applying any of the provisions in Title 14 — the probate code — -to insurance policies.”
Jordan v. Burgbacher, 883 P.2d 458 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 6× “” AR.S. §§ 14-6101 through 14-6114; 14-6201.”
Agans v. Barnd, 998 P.2d 449 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 14-6101. C. Legislative Abrogation of Guerrero ¶ 9 The trial court’s inclusion of the insurance proceeds in decedent’s probate estate was intended to further the public policy identified in Guerrero of protecting a surviving spouse and minor children.”
May v. Ellis, 92 P.3d 859 (Ariz. 2004).
· cites it 2× “See also A.R.S. § 14-6101(A) (1995) (defining a “provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy” as “nontestamentary”).”
In Re the Est. of Kirkes, 273 P.3d 664 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 6× “This court requested supplemental briefing "on the issue of the applicability, if any, of A.R.S. §§ 14-6101 through 14-6227 to the account at issue here.”
Meyer v. Mikolay, 987 P.2d 822 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 6× “They then say: the purpose of section 6-101 [of the Uniform Act] and its Arizona counterpart, A.R.S. § 14-6101, was to avoid a conflict between the validity of a beneficiary designation in a life insurance contract and that of similar clauses in other contractual instruments.”
Matter of Est. of Nelson, 657 P.2d 427 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 3× ““§ 14-6101. Definitions ****** 6. ‘Net contribution’ of a party to a joint account as of any given time is the sum of all deposits thereto made by or for him, less all withdrawals made by or for him which have not been paid to or applied to the use of any other party, plus a pro…”
Tsanos v. Zistatsis (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 8× “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 14-6101, nonprobate transfers of certain assets at death are nontestamentary.”
Fairbanks, III v. Fairbanks (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 7× “A.R.S. § 14-6101. Section 14-6101(A) states, “[a] provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy, .”
In Re Est. of Moore, 97 P.3d 103 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 14-6101(A) (2003); UNUM, 200 Ariz.”
In Re the Est. of Fred N. Kirkes (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 5× “That statute states: 2 This court requested supplemental briefing “on the issue of the applicability, if any, of A.R.S. §§ 14-6101 through 14-6227 to the account at issue here.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-6101(5) — 1 case
Jordan v. Burgbacher, 883 P.2d 458 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
“” AR.S. §§ 14-6101 through 14-6114; 14-6201.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-6101(6) — 1 case
Matter of Est. of Nelson, 657 P.2d 427 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982).
““§ 14-6101. Definitions ****** 6. ‘Net contribution’ of a party to a joint account as of any given time is the sum of all deposits thereto made by or for him, less all withdrawals made by or for him which have not been paid to or applied to the use of any other party, plus a pro…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-6101(A) — 7 cases
Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Craig, 26 P.3d 510 (Ariz. 2001).
“R.S. § 14-6101(A) (1995). Diane’s estate would have us conclude that because this statute operates to define insurance policies as nontestamentary, such designation prohibits us from applying any of the provisions in Title 14 — the probate code — -to insurance policies.”
May v. Ellis, 92 P.3d 859 (Ariz. 2004).
“See also A.R.S. § 14-6101(A) (1995) (defining a “provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy” as “nontestamentary”).”
In Re the Est. of Kirkes, 273 P.3d 664 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
“This court requested supplemental briefing "on the issue of the applicability, if any, of A.R.S. §§ 14-6101 through 14-6227 to the account at issue here.”
In Re Est. of Moore, 97 P.3d 103 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
“A.R.S. § 14-6101(A) (2003); UNUM, 200 Ariz.”
Fairbanks, III v. Fairbanks (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“A.R.S. § 14-6101. Section 14-6101(A) states, “[a] provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy, .”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-6101(B)(1) — 2 cases
Fairbanks, III v. Fairbanks (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“A.R.S. § 14-6101. Section 14-6101(A) states, “[a] provision for a nonprobate transfer on death in any insurance policy, .”
Tsanos v. Zistatsis (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“Pursuant to A.R.S. § 14-6101, nonprobate transfers of certain assets at death are nontestamentary.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.