Wills and Trusts Assignment

Issue

Sarah and George are the beneficiaries of “ THE DONNA MASON FAMILY TRUST”  and they are upset with their uncle Joe the appointed trustee. He put the $250,000 in a CD that earns 2.25% a year because he did not feel comfortable putting it in stocks of mutual funds because they can decrease or be lost. Sarah and George would rather the money be invested so the funds can increase, and would like to petition the court to have him removed as the trustee.

Rule

It is the duty of the court to refuse to remove a trustee at the mere whim or caprice of the beneficiary. There should be a substantial reason appearing to the court before it removes the trustee, who enjoyed the confidence of the person who created the trust and who by reason of his fitness for executing it, was empowered to act as trustee.

Neafie's Estate, 199 Pa. 307, 309, 49 A. 129, 129 (1901)

Fiduciaries Act of June 7, 1917 Pa. Laws 447, § 53(a) when for any reason the interests of the estate or property were likely to be jeopardized by the continuance of any such fiduciary. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the trustee's removal because there was ample evidence that the interests of the trust estate were jeopardized by his incompetence.

Corr Estate, 358 Pa. 591, 593, 58 A.2d 347, 348 (1948)

A trustee will not be removed at the mere whim or caprice of a beneficiary; some substantial reason must be shown before a fiduciary will be replaced. This is particularly true where only one beneficiary desires the trustee's removal and that beneficiary represents a minority interest.

Barnes's Estate, 339 Pa. 88, 90, 14 A.2d 274, 275 (1940)

Analysis

In the case of Corr Estate the judge trial court did remove the appointed trustee because he failed to adequately perform his duties and therefore put the estate in jeopardy.

Under the Fiduciaries Act of June removal of a fiduciary is granted when for any reason the interest of the estate are at risk because of the failure to perform the duties appointed to them . In no way could Sarah and George prove that their uncles decision to put the money in a CD warrant the removal of him as the estates trustee. He is being responsible by looking out for their best interests and not gambling with their future by making investments and gambling the money with the risk of losing it.