Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Here, she almost made away with $350,000. The plaintiff and defendant were in a romantic relationship for about eight years, during which they had a joint bank account. Nine years after the relationship ended, the defendant received an inheritance of about $700,000. He put the money into the joint account but withdrew it and deposited it into a different one. The plaintiff sued, claiming that he owed her half of that sum under the Pennsylvania Multiple Party Accounts Act (“MPAA”) because they jointly owned the account with the right of survivorship. The Pennsylvania Superior Court disagreed. It held that subsequent legislative actions implicitly impacted the validity of In re Beninger’s Estate. That case preceded the MPAA. The Pennsylvania legislature enacted the MPAA assuming that a person who deposits funds in a multiple-party account usually does not intend to make an irrevocable gift of all or any part of the funds represented by the deposit. As a result, the Superior Court affirmed the lower court’s order granting the defendant’s preliminary objections and discharging the suit.