or to the survivor or survivors after the death of 1 of them .... The making of the deposit in such form shall, in the absence of fraud or undue influence, be prima facie evidence ... of the intention of such depositors to vest title to such deposit and the additions thereto in such survivor or survivors. 3 In re Soltys Estate, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued January 7, 2014 (Docket No. 311143). 4 In re Soltys Estate, 497 Mich 908 (2014). 5 In re Soltys Estate (On Remand), unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued February 24, 2015 (Docket No. 311143). 6 Jacques v Jacques, 352 Mich 127, 136-137 (1958). 7 Id. at 137. 8 Lau v Lau, 304 Mich 218, 224 (1943). 9 Soltys Estate (On Remand), unpub op at 4. 10 See Lau, 304 Mich at 221-223 (<HOLDING>). 11 See Anderson v Lewis, 342 Mich 53, 60
holding that the decedents estate had standing because the traditional requirement that the plaintiff show an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendant is met by the allegation in the complaint that the defendants actions resulted in the diminishment of the assets of the estate holding that the decedents statements during his lifetime that his estate would be evenly divided among his four children were insufficient to overcome the statutory presumption that ownership of the decedents joint accounts went to the survivor holding a decedents estate is not a legal entity and only individuals administering the estate can be sued on estates behalf recognizing presumption and finding that it was overcome holding evidence insufficient to overcome presumption of correctness