Cutter v. . Trust Co.

197 S.E. 542, 213 N.C. 686
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 15, 1938
StatusPublished

This text of 197 S.E. 542 (Cutter v. . Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cutter v. . Trust Co., 197 S.E. 542, 213 N.C. 686 (N.C. 1938).

Opinion

Civil action to change, alter and amend administrative features of life insurance trust agreement.

This action was instituted by the trustor, John II. Cutter, and his wife and their son and daughter, against the trustee and the grandchildren of the trustor for the purpose of having the administrative provisions of the trust agreement changed to the end that the trustee be given much broader power in reference to the nature of the investments which could be made of the funds realized from the policies of insurance upon the death, or other maturity or surrender of any policy.

The parties waived jury trial and agreed that the judge presiding find all facts necessary for a determination of the cause, and upon such findings of fact to declare the law thereon and enter judgment in accordance therewith, subject to right of appeal to the Supreme Court.

The court heard evidence, and upon the evidence and from the record in the cause and from the allegations and admissions of the pleading, found substantially the following facts:

"1. That all parties plaintiff are properly before the court, and that all parties defendant have been duly served with summons in this cause as by law provided and are before the court. *Page 688

"2. That James O. Moore, Esq., of the Mecklenburg County bar, has, by an order entered in this cause, been duly appointed as guardian ad litem for the minor defendants, John Hastings Cutter, 3rd, and Linda Richardson Cutter and Burton Sparling Davis, 3rd, and of any and all children who may hereafter be born unto either George King Cutter or Mary Anne Cutter Davis, and that said guardian ad litem has been duly served with copies of the complaint and summons in this cause and has filed answer on behalf of the said minor defendants now in being or hereafter to be born, admitting the allegations of the complaint and joining in the prayers for relief as set forth in the complaint.

"3. That American Trust Company, trustee, has filed answer in this cause, as appears in the record.

"4. That plaintiff John H. Cutter is 58 years of age; that Grace King Cutter is his wife, and George King Cutter, whose wife is Nancy Bell Cutter, and Mary Anne Cutter Davis, whose husband is Burton Sparling Davis, Jr., are the only children of the said John H. Cutter. That George King Cutter was born 29 September, 1912, and that John Hastings Cutter, 3rd, who was born 26 July, 1935, and Linda Richardson Cutter, who was born 30 June, 1937, are the only children of the said George King Cutter. That Mary Anne Cutter Davis was born 3 December, 1915, and that Burton Sparling Davis, 3rd, who was born on 15 August, 1936, is the only child of the said Mary Anne Cutter Davis.

"5. That American Trust Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of North Carolina, and is duly authorized and empowered to act as trustee in a fiduciary capacity.

"6. That during the month of November, 1932, plaintiff John H. Cutter executed and delivered to Independence Trust Company, a North Carolina corporation then authorized and empowered to act as trustee in a fiduciary capacity, the life insurance trust agreement."

Simultaneously therewith he deposited with the trustee several policies of insurance upon his life in the total amount of $196,000, which he constituted the subject matter of the trust and referred to as the trust estate. The agreement provided in part:

"The insured hereby grants, bargains, sells, transfers, assigns and sets over the aforesaid trust estate, with any additions thereto that may hereafter be made, to the trustee, subject to the following conditions and limitations:

"1. The trustee shall hold, manage, invest and reinvest the trust estate and shall collect the income. The policies of insurance held by the trustee hereunder shall be payable to the trustee and to that end the insured agrees to execute assignments, changes of beneficiaries and any other instruments which may be necessary.

"2. The trustee is hereby invested with all right, title and interest in and to the policies and authorized to exercise and enjoy all rights *Page 689 therein and beneficial interests thereunder as fully and effectually as the insured. The insurance companies are hereby authorized and directed to recognize the trustee as fully entitled to all rights and interest under the policies, and any receipts, releases and other instruments duly executed by the trustee, in connection with the said policies, shall be binding and effective. It is distinctly understood that the insured fully realized that he is, by this instrument, giving to the trustee full title to the trust estate, and that he has no right to revoke, change, alter, or modify this agreement in any manner, under any circumstances, it being the intent of the insured to make this instrument irrevocable."

The agreement further provides that "upon the death of the insured, or other maturity or surrender of any policy," the trustee shall collect the proceeds thereof and "hold, manage, invest and reinvest the principal thereof" in bonds of the United States, the State of North Carolina, or any county or city located in North Carolina of sufficient rating to be classed at the time of purchase as legal investments for savings banks of the State of New York. The agreement further provided that the entire net income from the fund thus created shall be paid to the plaintiff, Mrs. Grace King Cutter, wife of said John II. Cutter, so long as she may live, for the use of herself and George King Cutter and Mary Anne Cutter, now Mary Anne Cutter Davis, son and daughter of the insured, trustor. Upon the death of his wife, Grace King Cutter, the funds is to be divided into two equal shares — one share to be held for the sole use and benefit of said Mary Anne Cutter, "so long as she may live," paying to her the entire net income in either monthly or quarterly installments, as may seem advisable. The other share to be held for the sole use and benefit of said George King Cutter and the income paid to him until he shall reach the age of 30 years, when one-third of such share shall be delivered to him. Then from that time the income from the remaining two-thirds shall be paid to said George King Cutter until he reaches the age of 35, when the trustee shall deliver to him "the entire balance remaining in his share of this fund — free from trust."

The agreement further provides that the son and daughter of the trustor, respectively, shall have the right to instruct the trustee by an instrument in writing, or by last will and testament, as to distribution of the corpus of the share of each. The agreement further provides that, in the event of the failure of either to give instructions, and in the event of his or her death without issue his or her share would go to the other. There is not express provision as to distribution of the remainder after the life estates to the son and daughter of the trustor in the event of the death of one or both of them leaving issue.

The agreement further provides:

"5. Should the insured or the beneficiaries named herein, or any other person, firm or corporation fail to pay premiums on policies herein set *Page 690 out, the trustee in its sole discretion may pay such premiums, either by executing policy lien notes, or by borrowing sufficient funds for this purpose. Should the trustee elect to borrow or advance funds for the payment of premiums, the trustee shall, out of the first money coming into its hands, from any source constituting a part of this trust estate, repay such loans or advances with interest.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ferguson v. . Price
173 S.E. 1 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
McGehee v. . McGehee
127 S.E. 684 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
Rhode Island Hospital Trust Co. v. Doughton
121 S.E. 741 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1924)
American Trust Co. v. Nicholson
78 S.E. 152 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1913)
McLean v. . Hardin
56 N.C. 294 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1857)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 S.E. 542, 213 N.C. 686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cutter-v-trust-co-nc-1938.