In re RIDDELL
    
      157 P.3d 888 (2007)
    
      NATURE OF THE CASE: Ralph Riddell, the trustee, appealed the trial court's denial of his 
      motion to modify the trust and create a special needs trust on behalf of a trust 
      beneficiary, his daughter, Nancy I. Dexter, who suffers from schizophrenia affective 
      disorder and bipolar disorder.
    
      FACTS: George and Irene were husband and wife with one child, Ralph. George's Last Will 
      and Testament left the residue of his estate in trust for the benefit of his wife, his son, 
      his daughter-in-law, and his grandchildren. George created an additional trust for their 
      benefit. Irene's Last Will and Testament left the residue of her estate in trust for the 
      benefit of her son; her son's wife, Beverly Riddell; and her grandchildren. Upon the death 
      of Ralph and Beverly, George and Irene's grandchildren would receive the trust's benefits 
      until the age of thirty-five when the trusts would terminate and the trustee would 
      distribute the principal to the grandchildren. Ralph is currently the Trustee. George and 
      Irene are both deceased. Nancy suffers from schizophrenia affective disorder and bipolar 
      disorder. She is not expected to live independently for the remainder of her life. Nancy 
      will receive her grandparents' trust principal, which is approximately one half of 
      $1,335,000. Ralph, filed a petition in superior court, asking to create a 'special needs' 
      trust on Nancy's behalf, instead of distributing the trust principal to her. Upon 
      distribution, Nancy's trust funds would either be seized by the State of Washington to pay 
      her extraordinary medical bills or Nancy would manage the funds poorly due to her mental 
      illness and lack of judgment. The trial court denied the motion to modify. The trial court 
      found that the trust's purpose was 'to provide for the education, support, maintenance, and 
      medical care of the beneficiaries' and that a modification would only 'permit the family to 
      immunize itself financially from reimbursing the State for costs of [Nancy's medical] care.' 
      This appeal followed. 
    
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get 
      free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples 
      of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
 
No comments:
Post a Comment