McGuire Woods published its October installment of the Fiduciary Advisory Services – a series focusing on recent cases and developments in fiduciary law. The following cases are examined within this report:
In the Matter of Cleopatra Cameron Gift Trust Dated May 26, 1998. The Supreme Court of South Dakota held that a California court’s order requiring payment of child support from a trust was not entitled to full faith and credit, and that the father’s child support rights were not enforceable against the trust.
Alexander v. Harris, 2019 WL 2147281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 17, 2019). A Florida appellate court held that a father’s special needs trust, which contained a spendthrift provision, is subject to garnishment to pay his child support obligations.
In re Ignacio G., 2019 WL 2376184, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 4648 (Tex. App. – Texarkana, June 6, 2019). Summary judgment on how to interpret a trust was inappropriate where the intent of the settlors was not shown by sufficiently clear and convincing evidence.
Levitan v. Rosen, 95 Mass. App. Ct. 248, 124 N.E. 3d 148 (2019). Interest in an irrevocable spendthrift trust created by a third party was deemed part of the marital estate to be considered in the division of property during a divorce, where the wife was the sole trust beneficiary.
In re Estate of Victor J. Mueller Irrevocable Trust Number One and Number Two, Stephanie Mueller v. Krohn, 2019 WL 3210857 (Wis. Ct. App. July 17, 2019). A trustee’s report adequately disclosed the existence of a claim so as to shorten the statute of limitations period to one year for matters disclosed in the report.
Vander Boegh v. Bank of Oklahoma, N.A., 2019 WL 1495712 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2019). Beneficiaries’ rights against a trustee are purely equitable, and a “letter of understanding” does not transform them into contract claims.
Posted by Katie Thompson, Assistant Editor of the Wealth Strategies Journal.