In re Gleeson’s Will
Not Reported in Official Reporter (1955)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A trustee is strictly prohibited from dealing with trust property in their individual capacity for personal profit, regardless of the trustee's good faith, the fairness of the transaction, or whether the trust suffered a loss.
Facts:
- On March 1, 1951, Mary Gleeson leased her 160-acre farm to a partnership consisting of Con Colbrook and William Curtin for a one-year term.
- Mary Gleeson died on February 14, 1952, just 15 days before the lease was set to expire.
- Gleeson's will nominated Con Colbrook as executor and as trustee of her residuary estate, which included the farm, for the benefit of her three children.
- After the lease expired on March 1, 1952, the partnership, including Colbrook, held over as tenants and continued to farm the land for another year.
- During this holdover year, Colbrook was acting as trustee for the property.
- Colbrook personally received a share of the profits realized by the partnership from farming the trust's property during the 1952 crop year.
Procedural Posture:
- Con Colbrook, as trustee, filed his first semi-annual report in the circuit court of Christian county.
- The trust beneficiaries (respondents) filed an objection to the report, arguing the trustee improperly failed to account for profits he received as a co-tenant of the trust's farm.
- The circuit court (trial court) overruled the beneficiaries' objection.
- The beneficiaries (appellants) appealed the circuit court's order to the Illinois Appellate Court.
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 trustee have a duty to account to the trust for profits he personally earned by leasing trust property to a partnership of which he is a member?
Opinions:
Majority - Presiding Justice Carroll
Yes. A trustee must account to the trust for any personal profits made from self-dealing with trust property. The long-standing equitable principle is that a trustee cannot deal in his individual capacity with trust property. The court rejected the trustee's argument that 'peculiar circumstances'—such as the testator's death occurring only 15 days before the new farm year, the difficulty of finding a new tenant on short notice, and his pre-existing tenancy—created an exception to this rule. The court held that the trustee's good faith, honesty, or the fact that the trust sustained no loss are irrelevant and cannot justify the self-dealing. Upon the testator's death, the petitioner had to choose whether to continue as a tenant or to act as a trustee; by choosing to act as trustee, he was precluded from dealing with himself.
Analysis:
This case reaffirms the strict and prophylactic nature of a trustee's duty of loyalty, specifically the prohibition against self-dealing. The court's refusal to consider factors like good faith or lack of harm to the trust demonstrates that the rule is absolute, designed to prevent the potential for conflict of interest rather than to remedy actual harm. This decision solidifies the principle that fiduciaries must avoid situations where their personal interests could conflict with their duties, forcing them to make a clear choice between personal benefit and fiduciary responsibility. For future cases, it serves as a strong precedent against creating ad hoc exceptions to the duty of loyalty, even when circumstances seem compelling.
Unlock the full brief for In re Gleeson’s Will