Nelson v. California Trust Co.

California Supreme Court

Nelson v. California Trust Co.

202 P.2d 1021, 33 Cal. 2d 501, 1949 Cal. LEXIS 210

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 25, 1949

DocketL. A. 20480

StatusPublished

Cited by29 cases

This text of 202 P.2d 1021 (Nelson v. California Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nelson v. California Trust Co., 202 P.2d 1021, 33 Cal. 2d 501, 1949 Cal. LEXIS 210 (Cal. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

GIBSON, C. J.

Nelson, in order to satisfy a judgment, is seeking to reach the assets of a spendthrift trust created by his judgment debtor Fred H. Bixby, Jr. The trial court found that all of the property in the trust was subject to the payment and satisfaction of the judgment held by Nelson. Defendant trustee appealed, contending that Bixby had no interest in the trust except to receive the net income and that his judgment creditor was in no better position than he was. Bixby, who was also named as a defendant, did not appeal.

The trust in question is the one involved in Bixby v. California Trust Co., ante, p. 495 [202 P.2d 1018], and it was there held that under the terms of the trust instrument Bixby was the sole beneficiary. It is against public policy to permit a man to tie up his property in such a way that he can enjoy it but prevent his creditors from reaching it, and *502 where the settlor makes himself a beneficiary of a trust any restraints in the instrument on the involuntary alienation of his interest are invalid and ineffective (McColgan v. Magee, Inc., 172 Cal. 182, 188-190 [155 P. 995, Ann.Cas. 1917D 1050]; see Rest., Trusts, § 156; 1 Scott on Trusts [1939] § 156; Griswold, Spendthrift Trusts [1947] pp. 542-550.) Since Bixby was the sole beneficiary, all the property in the trust is subject to the claims of Ms creditors.

The judgment is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Carter, J., Traynor, J., Schauer, J., and Spence, J., concurred.

Edmonds, J., did not participate herein.

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

GIBSON, C. J.

Nelson, in order to satisfy a judgment, is seeking to reach the assets of a spendthrift trust created by his judgment debtor Fred H. Bixby, Jr. The trial court found that all of the property in the trust was subject to the payment and satisfaction of the judgment held by Nelson. Defendant trustee appealed, contending that Bixby had no interest in the trust except to receive the net income and that his judgment creditor was in no better position than he was. Bixby, who was also named as a defendant, did not appeal.

The trust in question is the one involved in Bixby v. California Trust Co., ante, p. 495 [202 P.2d 1018], and it was there held that under the terms of the trust instrument Bixby was the sole beneficiary. It is against public policy to permit a man to tie up his property in such a way that he can enjoy it but prevent his creditors from reaching it, and *502 where the settlor makes himself a beneficiary of a trust any restraints in the instrument on the involuntary alienation of his interest are invalid and ineffective (McColgan v. Magee, Inc., 172 Cal. 182, 188-190 [155 P. 995, Ann.Cas. 1917D 1050]; see Rest., Trusts, § 156; 1 Scott on Trusts [1939] § 156; Griswold, Spendthrift Trusts [1947] pp. 542-550.) Since Bixby was the sole beneficiary, all the property in the trust is subject to the claims of Ms creditors.

The judgment is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Carter, J., Traynor, J., Schauer, J., and Spence, J., concurred.

Edmonds, J., did not participate herein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 P.2d 1021, 33 Cal. 2d 501, 1949 Cal. LEXIS 210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-california-trust-co-cal-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack