Gregge v. Hugill

William's wife died in 1996; he died in 2011. Upon the wife's death, their trust established the decedent’s irrevocable trust, and the survivor’s amendable, revocable trust. Upon the death of the surviving spouse, both trusts would terminate; 30 percent of the survivor’s trust would be distributed to William’s children, with the rest set aside in a grandchildren’s trust. The document contained a no contest provision. In 1997, William executed the first amendment to the survivor’s trust After William’s death, a grandson filed a Probate Code section 17200 petition to determine the validity of a 2008 amendment, alleging that William lacked testamentary capacity and was subject to undue influence when he executed the amendment. The court dismissed, based the fact that another grandchild disclaimed his interest, thereby restoring the petitioner’s interest in the trust estate. The court of appeal reversed. Acceptance of the disclaimer was contrary to public policies of effectuating a testator’s intent and dissuading elder abuse, and was premised on the erroneous view that the disclaimer effectuated a settlement of the lawsuit. A settlement assumes the consent of the parties; it is not a side deal between the court and a nonlitigant. The petitioner had an interest in challenging the validity of the 2008 amendment, and the prosecution of his petition was necessary to protect that interest. View "Gregge v. Hugill" on Justia Law