Gardenhire v. Superior Court
26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 143, 127 Cal. App. 4th 882 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Where a trust instrument allows for revocation by 'written notice' without further qualification, a will that unambiguously manifests the trustor's intent to revoke the trust constitutes a valid form of written notice under California Probate Code § 15401.
Facts:
- In 1989, Anne Pulizevich created the Anne Pulizevich Trust, naming herself as the trustee.
- The Trust instrument specified that it could be revoked 'by written notice signed by the Trustor and delivered to the Trustee.'
- Pulizevich transferred a parcel of real property into the Trust.
- The Trust designated O’Connor Hospital as the ultimate beneficiary of the trust assets after the death of several life beneficiaries, including Josephine Francesconi and Ivka Barilovic.
- In January 2002, Pulizevich executed a new will that expressly revoked all prior wills.
- The 2002 will disposed of the real property in a manner different from the Trust, creating a new testamentary trust for Francesconi and Barilovic, with St. Anne’s Maternity Home as the ultimate beneficiary.
Procedural Posture:
- After Anne Pulizevich's death, Josephine Francesconi filed a petition in probate court.
- The petition sought a determination that Pulizevich's 2002 will had revoked her 1989 Trust.
- Sister Judith Lynn Gardenhire, as trustee of the 1989 Trust, opposed the petition.
- Gardenhire filed a motion for summary judgment in the trial court, arguing that a will could not, as a matter of law, revoke the Trust.
- The trial court denied Gardenhire's motion for summary judgment.
- Gardenhire then filed a petition for a writ of mandate in the California Court of Appeal, asking it to overturn the trial court's denial of her motion.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a will that unambiguously manifests an intent to revoke a trust constitute a valid 'written notice' of revocation under a trust instrument that permits revocation by 'written notice' delivered to the trustee, even if the trust does not explicitly mention revocation by will?
Opinions:
Majority - Rushing, P. J.
Yes, a will that unambiguously manifests an intent to revoke a trust can constitute a valid 'written notice' of revocation. The court must first ascertain and give effect to the intent of the trustor. Because the trust instrument did not limit or qualify the term 'written notice,' it authorized revocation via any writing that unambiguously manifested the trustor's intent to revoke, including a will. This interpretation is supported by the fact that Pulizevich was her own trustee, meaning she could not be mistaken about her own intent regardless of the form of written notice used. The court rejected the rigid view from the Restatement of Trusts that a will cannot have an inter vivos (during life) effect, reasoning that a will can provide immediate notice of intent upon delivery, even if its dispositional provisions only become effective at death. Furthermore, California Probate Code § 15401(a)(1) permits revocation by any method provided in the trust, and does not require that a trust specifically and expressly authorize revocation by will; general language that encompasses a will is sufficient.
Analysis:
This case prioritizes the trustor's clear, expressed intent over strict, formalistic requirements for trust revocation. By interpreting the general term 'written notice' to include a will, the court weakened the traditional distinction between inter vivos instruments and testamentary documents for the purpose of communicating intent. This decision serves as a caution to estate planners: if a trustor wishes to prevent revocation by a will, the trust instrument must explicitly state that the specified method of revocation is exclusive and that a will cannot be used. The ruling enhances flexibility for trustors but introduces potential ambiguity if a later will conflicts with a trust without explicitly mentioning revocation.
Unlock the full brief for Gardenhire v. Superior Court