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

appealprobatetrustwillappellee

appealtrustwillappellee

Related Cases

Sanderson v. Aubrey, 472 S.W.2d 286

Facts

Mrs. Lucas, the settlor, created an inter vivos trust in 1954 for her grandson, which was to be conveyed to him upon reaching 21 years of age. In 1965, she executed a will that included a revocation clause stating that the trust was revoked due to her disappointment with the beneficiary. After her death in 1969, the will was admitted to probate, and the appellee was granted the interest in the realty that had been the subject of the trust, which led to the appeal by the grandson.

Factual background: A Mrs. Lucas was the settlor. She died, testate, in September, 1969. In May, 1954, she conveyed the real estate interest in question to a Mr. Eskridge, trustee, to hold the same in trust for her grandson during his minority—to be conveyed to him upon becoming 21 years of age.

Issue

Whether the attempted revocation of the trust was effective.

The question posed by the instant appeal is whether the attempted revocation of a trust was effective.

Rule

In Texas, every trust is revocable by the trustor during their lifetime unless expressly made irrevocable. A definitive manifestation of the settlor's intention to revoke the trust is sufficient for revocation, even if the trustee is not notified.

In Texas ‘Every trust shall be revocable by the trustor during his lifetime, unless expressly made irrevocable by the terms of the instrument creating the same or by a supplement or amendment thereto .’ Vernon's Ann.Civ.St., Title 125A, and ‘The Texas Trust Act’, Art . 7425b et seq., specifically Sec. 41, ‘Revocable unless expressly made irrevocable’.

Analysis

The court determined that the language in Mrs. Lucas's will constituted a definitive manifestation of her intent to revoke the trust. The revocation was effective as of the date the will was executed, not upon her death. The court emphasized that the settlor's intention was clear and that the trust was extinguished at the time of the will's execution, allowing the property to revert to her for disposition by will.

Our holding is that there would be an effective revocation. Here, in view of the express written language of Mrs. Lucas, as settlor, there was evidenced a ‘definitive manifestation’ of like revocation as of the date she signed her instrument of will in July, 1965.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the judgment, concluding that the attempted revocation of the trust was effective as of the date of the will.

Judgment is affirmed.

Who won?

Annie Eva Aubrey prevailed in the case because the court found that the trust had been effectively revoked by the language in Mrs. Lucas's will.

Thereby is demonstrated the appellee's right to prevail.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Medlock v. Mitchell, 95 Ark. App. 132, 234 S.W.3d 901

Faville v. Burns, 2011 IL App (1st) 110335, 960 N.E.2d 99, 355 Ill.Dec. 656

Baxley v. Birmingham Trust Nat. Bank, 334 So.2d 848

Reid v. Estate of Sonder, 63 So.3d 7, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D611

Darr v. Billeaudeau, 2018 Ark. App. 16, 541 S.W.3d 460