With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Assembly to study this issue and enact legislation, as other states have done, to protect a co-tenant’s investment in property held in a joint tenancy with right of survivorship. For these reasons, I dissent from- the Court’s decision. 1 . Tennessee Code Annotated section 66-1-107 provides: In all estates, real and personal, held in joint tenancy, the part or share of any tenant dying shall not descend or go to the surviving tenant or tenants, but shall descend or be vested in the heirs, executors, or administrators, respectively, of the tenant so dying, in the same manner as estates held by tenancy in common. 2 . Michigan and Pennsylvania common law allow for the creation of a survivorship interest through express language. See Albro v. Allen, 434 Mich. 271, 454 N.W.2d 85, 88 (1990) (<HOLDING>); In re Estate of Quick, 588 Pa. 485, 905 A.2d

A: holding each share in a joint tenancy is presumed to be equal for purposes of alienation
B: holding that when a husband first acquired property and then conveyed it to his wife they could not hold the property as tenants by the entirety or joint tenants because the four unities did not coincide so the deed created a tenancy in common with a right of survivorship
C: holding that a debtors interest in a tenancy by the entirety is property of the bankruptcy estate under section 541 because of debtors undivided present interests in the use possession income and right of survivorship of the property
D: holding a joint tenancy with right of survivorship is created by express language in the granting instrument
D.