Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 655.78 (2025)
Deposit accounts in two or more names.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
655.78 Deposit accounts in two or more names.—
(1) Unless otherwise expressly provided in a contract, agreement, or signature card executed in connection with the opening or maintenance of an account, including a certificate of deposit, a deposit account in the names of two or more persons may be paid to, or on the order of, either or any of such persons or to, or on the order of, the guardian of the property of any such person who is incompetent, whether the other or others are competent. The check or other order for payment to any such person or guardian is a valid and sufficient release and discharge of the obligation of the institution for funds transferred thereby.
(2) In the case of a credit union, a member may designate any person or persons to hold deposits with the member in joint tenancy with the right of survivorship; but a joint tenant, unless he or she is a member in his or her own right, may not be permitted to vote, obtain a loan, or hold office or be required to pay an entrance or membership fee.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1996–2014 · leading case: Sandler v. Jaffe, 913 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
Sandler v. Jaffe, 913 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “At trial, appellant improperly relied on section 655.78(1), Florida Statutes (2003), to advance her position that as a joint owner of the account she was entitled to withdraw the funds.”
Mulato v. Mulato, 705 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). “According to section 655.78, the funds in a deposit account in the names of two or more persons may be paid to, or on the order of, either of such persons unless otherwise expressly provided in a contract, agreement or signature card.”
Columbia Bank v. Heather Johnson Turbeville, 143 So. 3d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). “Turbe-ville asserts that the Bank had no interest to protect because it was immune from liability pursuant to section 655.78, Florida *969 Statutes, which shields banks from liability for dispersing funds to joint account holders.”
Jones v. Barnett Bank, 670 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). “, and replaced by § 655.78, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1992).”
— 655.78(1) — 1 case
Sandler v. Jaffe, 913 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “At trial, appellant improperly relied on section 655.78(1), Florida Statutes (2003), to advance her position that as a joint owner of the account she was entitled to withdraw the funds.”
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.