Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

appealmotionprobatetrustwillcompliance
trialmotiontrustcomplianceappellant

Related Cases

Baldwin v. Estate of Winters, 944 So.2d 437, 31 Fla. L. Weekly D2868
View Case »
Estate of Turino, 8 Cal.App.3d 642, 87 Cal.Rptr. 581
View Case »
In re Gerbing’s Estate, 61 Ill.2d 503, 337 N.E.2d 29, 74 A.L.R.3d 1087
View Case »
Estate of Heggstad, 16 Cal.App.4th 943, 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 433
View Case »
Jackson v. Phillips, 14 Allen 539, 96 Mass. 539, 1867 WL 5527
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

In re Estate of Leon Erson Barrenger Trust, Not Reported in N.W.2d, 2017 WL 1967490

Facts

Leon E. Barrenger executed a trust and a will on May 13, 2005, which outlined the distribution of his estate upon his death. Over the years, Leon had a falling out with his son, Lynn, and wrote several letters expressing his intent to disinherit him. After Leon's death in 2014, Scott Barrenger filed a motion to confirm these writings as amendments to the trust, which the probate court denied, leading to this appeal.

On May 13, 2005, Leon E. Barrenger executed “THE LEON E BARRENGER TRUST,” which identified himself as both the trustor and the trustee. It provided, in pertinent part, the following with respect to how property was to be distributed upon his death: E. Distribution of Remainder of Trust Estate. Upon the death of the Trustor, the Trustee shall, after paying or reserving for all amounts payable, as provided in ARTICLE IV.A. through D., divide the remainder of the trust estate into four (4) equal shares set forth as follows and shall hold, administer and distribute each share according to the provisions of ARTICLE IV.F. hereinbelow: One (1) share each to Lynn H BARRENGER, GARY P BARRENGER, JUDY A GROOTERS, and SCOTT R BARRENGER.

Issue

Did the writings provided by Scott Barrenger constitute valid amendments to the trust under Michigan law?

The issue in this case is whether Leon amended the trust, and MCL 700.7602(3)(a) controls in such a situation.

Rule

Under MCL 700.7602(3)(a), a settlor may revoke or amend a revocable trust by substantially complying with a method provided in the terms of the trust.

MCL 700.7602(3)(a) provides as follows: 'The settlor may revoke or amend a revocable trust' '[b]y substantially complying with a method provided in the terms of the trust.'

Analysis

The court analyzed whether the writings reflected substantial compliance with the trust's requirements for amendments. It concluded that the writings demonstrated Leon's intent to disinherit Lynn and to redirect his share to his grandchildren, thus satisfying the legal standard for amending the trust despite the informal nature of the documents.

The court analyzed whether the writings reflected substantial compliance with the trust's requirements for amendments. It concluded that the writings demonstrated Leon's intent to disinherit Lynn and to redirect his share to his grandchildren, thus satisfying the legal standard for amending the trust despite the informal nature of the documents.

Conclusion

The court reversed the probate court's order and remanded the case for the entry of an order confirming the amendments to the trust.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order denying appellant's motion to confirm amendment to trust and remand this matter for the entry of an order granting the same.

Who won?

Scott Barrenger prevailed in the case because the court found that the writings he presented reflected Leon's intent to amend the trust, which was sufficient under Michigan law.

Scott Barrenger prevailed in the case because the court found that the writings he presented reflected Leon's intent to amend the trust, which was sufficient under Michigan law.

You must be