Wilber v. Owens
65 A.2d 843 (1949)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a testator's specific charitable purpose is impossible or impracticable to perform, the trust will not fail if the testator expressed a general charitable intent; instead, under the doctrine of cy pres, a court may direct the funds to a similar charitable purpose that effectuates the testator's general intent.
Facts:
- William Brokaw Bamford's will created a trust, the 'Exton-Bamford Research Fund,' with a bequest of $150,000.
- The will stated the trust's purpose was to continue and publish research outlined in Bamford's manuscript, 'Random Scientific Notes seeking the Essentials in Place and Space.'
- Bamford's manuscript was subsequently determined by experts to be irrational, unintelligible, and of no scientific value.
- The will expressed Bamford's dominant purpose was to benefit mankind and add to the 'sum-total of desirable human knowledge.'
- The will named Princeton University as an alternate trustee to carry out the purposes of the trust if other named trustees declined.
Procedural Posture:
- The executor of William Brokaw Bamford's estate filed a bill of complaint in a court of Chancery (a trial court) seeking a construction of the will.
- The Vice-Chancellor found that the specific purpose of the trust was impossible to accomplish but that the testator possessed a general charitable intent, rendering the trust valid.
- The Vice-Chancellor's decree applied the doctrine of cy pres and ordered the trust funds to be paid to The Trustees of Princeton University.
- An unnamed party appealed the Vice-Chancellor's decretal findings to the appellate court that authored this opinion.
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 charitable trust for scientific research fail when the specific research material designated by the testator is found to be irrational and valueless, or may a court apply the doctrine of cy pres to save the trust by directing the funds to a related charitable purpose if the testator demonstrated a broader, general charitable intent?
Opinions:
Majority - Heher, J.
No, the trust does not fail; a court may apply the doctrine of cy pres to save it. A trust for the advancement of education and learning is a valid charitable trust, and the irrationality of the testator's specific methods does not invalidate the trust if there is a general charitable intent. Here, the will reveals a dominant purpose to benefit mankind through scientific and philosophic research, which constitutes a general charitable intent. The testator's specific direction to use his 'Random Scientific Notes' was merely the means to achieve this broader end. Since the specific purpose is impossible to accomplish, the doctrine of cy pres is applicable. This doctrine allows a court to apply the trust funds to a similar charitable purpose that approximates the testator's general intent. Directing the funds to Princeton University for scientific and philosophical research is a proper exercise of cy pres, as it falls within the testator's general charitable intention and honors his selection of Princeton as a potential trustee.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the strong judicial policy of favoring charitable bequests and preventing them from failing due to impossibility or impracticability. It clarifies that the inquiry for applying cy pres focuses on the testator's general intent, which can be found by examining the entire will, rather than being confined to a single, flawed provision. The case establishes that a testator's benevolent purpose can be legally separated from their irrational or scientifically unsound methods, allowing courts to preserve the charitable goal. This precedent gives courts significant latitude to reform charitable trusts to align with a testator's overarching, rather than specific, intentions.
Unlock the full brief for Wilber v. Owens