Probate & Trust Law Section Conference Manual ... - Minnesota CLE

However, the individual’s interest as a beneficiary in proceeds from his
father’s trust did not fall into any of these three categories. Fannie Mae
argued that the injunction was an “anticipatory, standstill injunction.” The
court reasoned, however, that the plain language of Minn. Stat. § 575.05
did not authorize a district court to issue an anticipatory order forbidding a
debtor from disposing of property not in the hands of or due to the debtor
at the time the order was issued. Accordingly, the district court abused its
discretion when it issued the temporary injunction.
3. Watterson v. Burnard, No. L-12-1012, 2013 WL 425161 (Ohio Ct. App.
Feb. 1, 2013). Settlor’s death did not preclude use of revocable trust
assets to satisfy judgment of settlor. Claimant was injured in an
automobile accident caused by decedent. While the lawsuit was pending,
decedent died. At the time of her death, there was a revocable trust which
held the assets of decedent. Claimant filed a motion requesting the court
to issue an order that the trust assets were available to satisfy the judgment
as a result of the personal injury lawsuit. Relying on the fact that the
revocable trust assets were subject to the claims of the decedent during her
lifetime, the Court found that the legislature intended to allow creditors of
the settlor to access the trust assets and that an “arbitrary event” like the
decedent’s death should not prevent claimant from recovering a judgment
out of the assets of the revocable trust.
4. Gottstein v. Kraft, 274 P.3d 469 (Alaska 2012). Transfer of residence
to a revocable trust divested spouse of spousal rights. Husband and
wife set up reciprocal revocable trusts and funded the wife’s revocable
trust with their homestead. While the parties were separated, wife sold the
residence at below its tax-assessed value due to pressures to pay a loan
that the residence secured. Husband objected to the sale and recorded a
“Notice of Interest” on the property, claiming his spousal rights. The
Court found that the transfer to wife’s trust divested husband of his rights
to the property because wife had full discretion with respect to the
property.
E. Undue Influence
1. Davison v. Hines, 729 N.E.2d 330 (Ga. 2012). There was sufficient
evidence to support the sons’ claim that their father’s estate planning
documents were the products of undue influence. The decedent’s sons
brought an action again the personal representatives of the decedent’s
estate alleging the decedent’s will and revocable trust were products of
undue influence. Decedent executed a will in 2001 that left the bulk of his
estate to his wife for her life, and upon her death, divided the estate
equally between his sons. Thereafter, although decedent did not want to
move from his home, granddaughter made arrangements to move decedent
into her home. The evening that decedent was moved into the
granddaughter’s home, granddaughter hired a lawyer to draft and oversee
44