Weiss v. Weiss

237 N.E.2d 24, 354 Mass. 761
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 6, 1968
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 237 N.E.2d 24 (Weiss v. Weiss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Weiss v. Weiss, 237 N.E.2d 24, 354 Mass. 761 (Mass. 1968).

Opinion

The petitioner, son of the testator M. Murray Weiss, seeks the removal of Mrs. Nancy Weiss as cotrustee of a testamentary trust established for the benefit of Henry and Henry’s children. The other trustee is a corporate fiduciary. Mrs. Weiss is the testator’s widow and the stepmother of Henry. The petition alleges that Mrs. Weiss was hostile to Henry and unsuitable as cotrustee, and was unreasonable in withholding approval of expenditures relating to the education of one of Henry’s two children. Under the will the trustees were given discretionary power to apply the income of the trust to educating Henry’s children, their “decision . . . to be final and binding on all persons.” The judge made extensive findings of fact and dismissed the petition. Henry appeals. The evidence is reported. The issue is whether the judge was plainly wrong. Malone v. Walsh, 315 Mass. 484, 490. His ultimate findings were that (a) Mrs. Weiss is acting in a good, sound, discretionary manner, (b) she is working for the best interest of all concerned, and (c) if there is any hostility it comes from Henry and not from Mrs. Weiss. A reading of the transcript shows that findings (a) and (b) are supported by the evidence and are not plainly wrong and that finding (c) more precisely should be that such hostility as exists between Henry and Mrs. Weiss originated with Henry after his father’s death and is shown mainly by him. The factual situation is totally unlike that detailed in Cooney v. Montana, 347 Mass. 29. The evidence and the findings bring the case within the principles discussed and applied in Shirk v. Walker, 298 Mass. 251, 259, 260. Costs of appeal may be awarded by the Probate Court.

Decree affirmed.

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

Related

Steele v. Kelley
710 N.E.2d 973 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1999)
Hardiman v. Hardiman
418 N.E.2d 347 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
237 N.E.2d 24, 354 Mass. 761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weiss-v-weiss-mass-1968.