Spendthrift Trust

147 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• In re Elbert Wayne Goff and Wife v. Vince Taylor in Bankruptcy
  706 F.2d 574· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-06 ·cited 68×
  ERISA's anti-alienation provisions do not, by themselves, exempt a debtor's interest in a qualified pension trust from the bankruptcy estate under Section 541(c)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.
• Immaculata Gallagher v. Smith
  223 F.2d 218· 3d Cir.· 1955-06-03 ·cited 68×
  The court held that a beneficiary of a spendthrift trust remains taxable on income assigned, as such assignments are revocable under Pennsylvania law, and the Orphans' Court's confirmation of trustees' accounts does not constitute an adjudication of irrevocable divestment of prop
• Waterbury v. Munn
  159 Fla. 754· Fla.· 1947-11-25 ·cited 53×
  The court interpreted a codicil to a will that allowed trustees discretion to sell trust property and distribute proceeds, examining its effect on the original will's provisions for income distribution and protection against creditors.
• Croom v. Ocala Plumbing & Elec. Co.
  62 Fla. 460· Fla.· 1911-06-01 ·cited 51×
  Sarah B. Croom appealed a foreclosure decree on a mechanics' lien against her interest in property. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that even if spendthrift trusts were valid in Florida, the deed at issue did not effectively shield the property from creditors' claims
• In re Graham v. Graham
  726 F.2d 1268· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-20 ·cited 44×
  An ERISA-required anti-alienation provision does not exclude pension funds from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2), nor does it create a federal exemption under § 522(b)(2)(A).
• Bacardi v. White
  463 So. 2d 218· Fla.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that spendthrift trust disbursements can be garnished to enforce court-ordered alimony and attorney's fees as a last resort when traditional enforcement methods prove ineffective, overruling the Third District's decision and resolving a conflict wit
• First Nat'l Bank OF Salem v. Hirsch
  535 F.2d 343· 6th Cir.· 1976-05-10 ·cited 36×
  A party seeking to file a Rule 60(b) motion to vacate a district court judgment after an appeal has been filed must first file the motion in the district court.
• Beck v. Wylie
  60 So. 2d 190· Fla.· 1952-08-08 ·cited 36×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision, holding that a daughter's departure from her mother's home did not automatically disqualify the home from homestead status. The court emphasized that the mother, despite the daughter's conduct, remained the head of the
• In re Dyke v. Dyke
  943 F.2d 1435· 5th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 29×
  ERISA's antialienation provision does not preempt Texas Property Code section 42.0021(a) regarding retirement benefits in bankruptcy, nor does it qualify as 'applicable nonbankruptcy law' or 'other federal law' for exemption purposes.
• Morgenthaler v. First Atl. Nat'l Bank OF Daytona Beach
  80 So. 2d 446· Fla.· 1955-05-18 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when a testator directs an executor to purchase an annuity for a beneficiary, the beneficiary cannot elect to receive the corpus in lieu of the annuity, and the executor must ensure the annuity contract includes provisions preventing the annuit
• Educ. Assistance Corp. v. Zellner
  827 F.2d 1222· 8th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 26×
  A student loan nondischargeable in Chapter 7 is not automatically nondischargeable in Chapter 13, and the "best interests of creditors" test requires comparing actual Chapter 7 recovery to Chapter 13 plan payments.
• Franchise TAX Bd. OF the State OF Cal. v. Constr. Laborers Vacation Tr. FOR S. Cal.
  679 F.2d 1307· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts the State of California's attempt to levy on a vacation trust fund for unpaid personal income taxes.
• Commissioner OF Internal Revenue v. Est. of Harry A. Ellis
  252 F.2d 109· 3d Cir.· 1958-01-31 ·cited 26×
  The court held that only one-half of the residuary estate qualifies for the marital deduction because the widow's power to invade the corpus was limited by Pennsylvania law and she did not have the power to appoint the entire corpus in all events.
• McALLISTER v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  157 F.2d 235· 2d Cir.· 1946-08-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the transfer of a life interest in a trust for a lump sum constitutes the sale of a capital asset, not the anticipation of income.
• Mellon v. Driscoll
  117 F.2d 477· 3d Cir.· 1941-02-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the settlor's reserved power to revoke the trust, even if termed a power of termination, subjected the trust property to estate tax upon the settlor's death.
• FOX Valley & Vicinity Constr. Workers Pension Fund v. Laurine Brown (Lamar)
  897 F.2d 275· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-09 ·cited 23×
  A property settlement agreement does not constitute a binding waiver of ERISA plan benefits if the participant does not follow the plan's specific procedures for changing beneficiaries.
• McFADDIN v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (three Cases)
  148 F.2d 570· 5th Cir.· 1945-04-14 ·cited 23×
  Income from after-acquired trust property purchased with commingled community and separate funds is considered community property under Texas law, and the presumption favoring community property must be applied.
• Miller v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  147 F.2d 189· 6th Cir.· 1945-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Tax Court did not commit reversible error in finding the petitioner taxable under Section 22(a) for the income of the trusts he created, based on his retained control and benefits.
• In re Lucas v. Lucas
  924 F.2d 597· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-14 ·cited 20×
  Interests in an ERISA-qualified pension plan are excluded from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2) because ERISA's anti-alienation provisions constitute 'applicable nonbankruptcy law'.
• In re Newman v. Newman
  903 F.2d 1150· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-07 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the corpus of a valid spendthrift trust under state law is not property of the bankruptcy estate, and income distributions from such a trust within 180 days of filing are also not property of the estate as they do not constitute a bequest, devise, or inheritan
• Fenton L. Gilbert v. Gilbert
  447 So. 2d 299· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-01-27 ·cited 20×
  In this first-of-its-kind Florida case, the court held that a spendthrift trust may be garnished to collect unpaid alimony arrearages despite explicit spendthrift language protecting the beneficiary's interests from creditor claims. The court balanced the traditional rule favorin
• In re Johnson v. Fenslage
  724 F.2d 1138· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the tax-deferred annuity was not exempt from the bankruptcy estate under Texas law or ERISA, affirming the bankruptcy court's decision.
• Hays' Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  181 F.2d 169· 5th Cir.· 1950-04-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the decedent's direction for the trust to pay mortgage debts did not constitute a reservation of income, as her liability was contingent and remote, and the power to terminate the trust did not subject enjoyment to change.
• Young v. Handwork
  179 F.2d 70· 7th Cir.· 1949-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the bankrupt's vested equitable life estates in the trusts were transferable property under Section 70(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Act and thus passed to the bankruptcy trustee, and that the defendants consented to the court's diversity jurisdiction.
• United States v. Quinn Hickey
  917 F.2d 901· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to impose a fine, as the defendant failed to prove an inability to pay. The conviction is affirmed, but the sentence is vacated and remanded for resentencing.
• McLEAN v. Central States
  762 F.2d 1204· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-24 ·cited 16×
  A debtor's interest in a pension fund subject to a valid anti-assignment provision under applicable non-bankruptcy law is not property of the bankruptcy estate. Consequently, a contempt order based on non-compliance with a pay order directing such funds to the trustee is invalid.
• In re Ahlswede v. Crocker Citizens Nat'l Bank
  516 F.2d 784· 9th Cir.· 1975-04-29 ·cited 16×
  A bankruptcy court's equitable power to subordinate a claim is not unlimited and cannot override statutory provisions or state law recognizing spendthrift trusts absent inequitable conduct by the claimant.
• In re Witlin v. Witlin
  640 F.2d 661· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 15×
  A spendthrift trust created by a settlor for their own benefit is void as against creditors and not exempt from bankruptcy.
• In re Kincaid v. Watson
  917 F.2d 1162· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-25 ·cited 14×
  The concurring judge expresses doubt that a debtor's interest in an ERISA-qualified pension plan is property of the bankruptcy estate, arguing ERISA's restrictions should be considered 'applicable nonbankruptcy law' under 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2).
• Claude Pitrat, Kendrick M. Mercer, P.C. v. Garlikov
  947 F.2d 419· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-25 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Bankruptcy Code, not ERISA's preemption provision, should govern the validity of state exemption statutes in bankruptcy.
• United States v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  923 F.2d 341· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the two counts of bankruptcy fraud were not mutually repugnant and that 18 U.S.C. § 152 ¶ 7 applies to both pre- and post-petition conduct, affirming the convictions.
• White v. Bacardi
  446 So. 2d 150· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-01-24 ·cited 12×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal held that income from a spendthrift trust is exempt from garnishment to satisfy an ex-wife's alimony judgment, absent clear evidence that the settlor intended the former spouse to participate as a beneficiary. The court rejected the public pol
• Lucile Hansen v. Peoples Bank OF Bloomington
  594 F.2d 1149· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of diversity jurisdiction after requiring joinder of the non-diverse remaindermen as indispensable parties under Rule 19.
• Martha v. Dessar
  353 F.2d 468· 9th Cir.· 1965-11-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trust agreement, despite the trustor's retained powers, created a valid trust and was not a mere agency, thus the post-death disposition provisions were not subject to the statute of wills.
• State St. Tr. Co. v. United States
  263 F.2d 635· 1st Cir.· 1959-01-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that broad trustee powers, considered as a whole, allowed for substantial shifting of economic benefits between life tenants and remaindermen, warranting inclusion in the gross estate under IRC § 811(c)(1)(B).
• Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Porter
  148 F.2d 566· 5th Cir.· 1945-04-11 ·cited 12×
  Income distributed from spendthrift trusts established in New York to beneficiaries domiciled in Texas is community property, not separate property.
• Edward v. Regan
  691 F.2d 81· 2d Cir.· 1982-10-06 ·cited 11×
  Pension benefits are property of the bankruptcy estate under Chapter 13, and anti-assignment provisions do not prevent their use to fund repayment plans, nor do they cause disqualification under IRC § 401(a)(13).
• Ernice Shirley Weinkle Preston v. City Nat'l Bank OF Miami
  294 So. 2d 11· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-03-26 ·cited 11×
  A beneficiary of a spendthrift trust sought to rescind her assignment of rights to trust corpus, claiming lack of understanding, undue influence, and breach of fiduciary duty by her brother (the trustee). The Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment for the def
• HCA Gulf Coast Hosp. v. Est. OF Phyllis E. Downing
  594 So. 2d 774· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-12-16 ·cited 10×
  An heir possessing an equitable interest in real property through a spendthrift trust may benefit from the homestead exemption from forced sale, just as if the property passed directly.
• Page v. Michel Douglas Page
  371 So. 2d 543· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-05-29 ·cited 10×
  Sandra Schiller Page appealed a divorce judgment that denied her alimony and awarded only $40 per week in child support. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed the child support award, holding that the trial court erred by failing to consider the husband's spendthrift trust
• The Fla. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. AT Miami v. Blake
  155 So. 2d 798· Fla. 3d DCA· 1963-08-13 ·cited 10×
  Florida National Bank appeals the chancellor's dissolution of an irrevocable spendthrift trust created in 1954 by John Joseph Blake. The court reverses, holding that the chancellor erred in terminating the trust without all beneficiaries, including contingent beneficiaries and an
• SAX v. SAX
  294 F.2d 133· 5th Cir.· 1961-07-31 ·cited 10×
  A federal district court has jurisdiction over an action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance of trust assets, even if the trust situs is in another state, as long as personal jurisdiction over the parties is obtained.
• Buchanan v. Nat'l Sav. & Tr. Co
  146 F.2d 13· D.C. Cir.· 1944-11-13 ·cited 10×
  A trust created for the protection of descendants can be reached to enforce a child's right to support, even against a spendthrift provision, if the beneficiary fails to provide for the child.
• White v. Bourne
  151 Fla. 12· Fla.· 1942-07-07 ·cited 10×
  This case concerns whether a County Judge has the authority to approve an agreement settling a will contest and distributing an estate. The appellate court found that the County Judge does have such jurisdiction, as it is incidental to the administration of the estate.
• Verone Marin Fehlhaber v. Fehlhaber
  850 F.2d 1453· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-01 ·cited 9×
  A judgment-creditor can reach the assets of a trust through garnishment when the judgment-debtor is both the settlor and sole beneficiary, retaining complete control over the trust assets.
• Genova v. The Fla. Nat'l Bank OF Palm Beach Cnty.
  433 So. 2d 1211· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-02-02 ·cited 9×
  A settlor sought to revoke her revocable trust and sued for mandamus to compel the trustee bank to surrender its assets. The trial court denied the mandamus petition and granted the trustee's petition for instructions, finding the revocation was procured by undue influence from t
• Arellano v. Lisette Arellano Bisson and Lower Randolph J. Bisson
  847 So. 2d 998· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-04-02 ·cited 8×
  Jorge and Ana Laura Arellano, who obtained a judgment for attorney's fees against the appellees, sought to use supplementary execution proceedings to reach trust income that might become due to the appellees from a spendthrift trust. The court affirmed the trial court's denial, h
• Kurzweg v. Marple
  841 F.2d 635· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appeal against the bank was frivolous and affirmed the dismissal of claims against both the daughter and the bank, imposing sanctions against the father and son.
• In re Est. of Edgar M. UHL v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  241 F.2d 867· 7th Cir.· 1957-03-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that only the portion of the trust corpus necessary to generate the retained monthly income is includable in the decedent's gross estate for federal estate tax purposes.
• Seidenberg v. Seidenberg
  225 F.2d 545· D.C. Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The public policy of the District of Columbia requires that the interest of a father in a spendthrift trust may be invaded for the support of his minor children.