Zari purchased 20 acres of land from Deon. Since Zari was immediately leaving the country to serve in the Peace Corps for two years and was unable to attend the closing, she asked Deon to deed the property to her close friend Kaleehja. Deon conveyed the property by deed to Kaleehja in her name. When Zari returns, Kaleehja refuses to turn over the property and claims the property was a gift to her from Zari. Zari denies the property was a gift and demands that Kaleehja return the property. Answer and explain the following:

If it goes to court, in your opinion, which party would win this case? See Rainey v. Rainey, 795 S.W.2d 139 (Tenn,App. 1990).

In Rainey v. Rainey the court ruled:

The Tennessee Raineys insist that it was William J.'s and John's intention that William J. own a one-half interest in the farm and John own the other one-half interest. They contend that the farm was deeded in the names of J.R. (John) Rainey and Tommy Ray Rainey in order to facilitate the refinancing of the farm when the balloon payment of the third year came due, since William J. allegedly had bad credit. The Tennessee Raineys further contend that as a result, John held William J.'s one-half interest in trust. In their appellate brief, the Tennessee Raineys present a substantial amount of authority to support the above proposition. This argument would have had some foundation if William J. had paid for his one-half interest as contemplated by William J. and John. As the trial court found, and we concur in the finding, William J. paid nothing. There is nothing in the record that even hints that John intended to make a gift to William J. and in fact William J. does not so contend.*146 Under the facts here, no trust arose in favor of William J. Rainey.

If Zari had died while in the Peace Corps, would the property belong to Kaleehja?