England v. Decker

441 Mass. 1013
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided April 20, 2004·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

A single justice of this court has reserved and reported this case to the full court. The trustees seek to reform the Frederick J. England Family Trust by dividing “Trust B” into two separate trusts, a generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax exempt trust and a GST tax nonexempt trust, in order to minimize Federal GST taxes and administration expenses.4 We have previously allowed reformations of this type. See Fleet Nat’l Bank v. Kahn, 438 Mass. 1004 (2002); Fleet Nat’l Bank v. Marquis, 437 Mass. 1010 (2002); Fleet Nat'l Bank v. Mackey, 433 Mass. 1009 (2001).

After a thorough review of the record, we are satisfied that the proposed [1014] reform promotes the settlor’s intent and should be allowed as a matter of Massachusetts law. The language of the trust reveals that the settlor was tax conscious, and there is no provision prohibiting such a division of the trust. The proposed division will not affect the dispositive terms of the trust nor will it alter any beneficial interests. This type of trust reform is minimal and constitutes only a “fine tuning of the administration of the trustf] ... in order to reduce, if not eliminate, the application of the GST tax.” BankBoston v. Marlow, 428 Mass. 283, 286 (1998), quoting First Agric. Bank v. Coxe, 406 Mass. 879, 883 n.6 (1990).

Jeffrey P. Hart, John D. Stuebing, & Karen L. McKenna, for the plaintiffs, submitted a brief.

A judgment shall be entered in the county court authorizing the plaintiffs to divide and administer “Trust B” as requested in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the complaint’s prayer for relief.

So ordered.

Footnotes

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

England v. Decker, 441 Mass. 1013 (Mass. 2004).

441 Mass. 1013 (England v. Decker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Inderieden v. Downs
445 Mass. 1011 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2005)