MARSMAN V. NASCA
30 Mass. App. Ct. 789, 573 N.E.2d 1025 (1991)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an action for conveyance of real property. Appealed. Nasca
(D), trustee, appealed an order executrix, holding that the trustee, who had the
discretionary power to pay principal for support and maintenance, had a duty to inquire into
the financial resources of a beneficiary under a testamentary trust.
FACTS: Testatrix left money in her will in trust for her husband, Cappy. Under the terms
of the trust, Cappy was to receive all of the income from the trust. Additionally, he was
able to reach the principal if, upon inquiry by the trustees into his financial situation,
it appeared that he needed this money for his comfortable support and maintenance. After
Testatrix's death, he began having financial difficulties. He remarried, and retained the
trustee under Testatrix's will to draft a new will for him, in which he left all his
property to his new wife (P). Subsequently, Cappy requested a distribution of a portion of
the principal. The trustee, who was aware of Cappy's financial problems, sent him a check
for $300, and asked him to explain his need for the money in writing. The attorney did not
investigate Cappy's financial circumstances, and did not make any further distributions of
principal until Cappy entered a nursing home almost ten years later.
In order to remain in the house, he had bought with his wife, Cappy arranged with his
stepdaughter to convey a remainder interest in the property to her and her husband,
Marlette, while he retained a life estate. In return, the stepdaughter and her husband
assumed most of the expenses associated with the house. The same lawyer who drafted
Testatrix's will, and Cappy's will, and served as trustee, also drafted the deed.
Notwithstanding Cappy's will, P was to have no interest or right to remain in the house
after Cappy's death. Although she was aware of this, she believed that the stepdaughter
would allow her to live in the house after Cappy's death. However, the stepdaughter
predeceased Cappy. Upon Cappy's death, Marlette sent P a notice to vacate the premises. P
filed suit, arguing that the trustee had a duty to inquire into Cappy's financial situation.
The lower court found that the trustee did have a duty to inquire into Cappy's financial
situation, that he had breached this duty, and that but for the breach, Cappy would not have
conveyed the house to his stepdaughter. The court ordered Marlette to covey the house to P,
and ordered the trustee to reimburse Marlette for expenses incurred in the upkeep of the
house. To the extent that the trust funds were insufficient to reimburse Marlette, the
trustee was to be personally liable for them. Marlette and the trustee both appeal.
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