In Schoukroun v. Karsenty, 177 Md. App. 615, 937 A.2d 626 (2007), the intermediate appellate Court extended the principle of Knell v. Price to a revocable trust and pay on death accounts. Because these inter vivos transfers are not “complete, absolute, and unconditional,” the transfers are per se fraud on the spousal election.  In other words, the Court of Appeals applied the law as apparently set out in Knell v. Price.  However, the Court of Appeals reversed Schoukroun in 2008.  The Court held that the decedent’s (Mr. Schoukroun) revocable trust and transfer-on-death accounts were not part of his net estate, and were thus not subject to his wife’s right to an elective share.  The Court clarified that the holding in Knell was not a bright-line rule, and that a grantor’s retention of control over an asset is not the sole factor to consider when invalidating an inter vivos transfer as to the surviving spouse.  Other factors to consider include the extent of control retained by the decedent, the decedent’s motives, the transferee’s motives, the degree to which the inter vivos transfer deprives the surviving spouse of property that she would otherwise take as part of the decedent’s estate, non-probate arrangements that the decedent made for the surviving spouse, inter vivos gifts that the decedent gave to the surviving spouse, whether the decedent actually exercised the retained control or otherwise enjoyed the property at issue, and, if so, to what extent, and the familial relationship between the decedent and the person or persons who benefit by the inter vivos transfer.  Schoukroun v. Karsenty, 406 Md. 469, 959 A.2d 1147 (2008).