Wilma was a singer and actress. Her TV show was wildly
popular with teenage girls. By age 18, she had amassed a small
fortune worth several million dollars and a house on the beach in
Malibu. Because her mother died young from a rare disease that is
transmitted genetically, Wilma decided to draft a will, even though she
was only 18. She did some research on the internet and decided
she knew how to do it. So she typed it on her laptop, printed it,
and then signed it in the presence of her father and her friend Jane,
who was 17 years old at the time. She told them it was her
will. Her father and Jane then also signed it. Under the law, the
signature of a witness under 18 years old is invalid.
The will gave the Malibu house to Wilma’s
father. The rest of the estate went into a trust (Wilma’s aunt
Tess is the trustee) that is to pay the net income to Wilma’s only
sibling, a severely disabled brother named Bro. (For the past
several years Wilma had paid for Bro’s care in an excellent but
expensive private institution.) When Bro dies, the remainder goes
to a charity, Habitat for Humanity. Wilma did not know a lot
about Habitat, but did some research and decided it would be a good
cause to support (the charity builds housing for low income people).
Three years later, when Wilma was 21, she and her
father were traveling by car to a concert when a large truck smashed
into them. Dad was instantly killed and Wilma survived for two
days before succumbing to her injuries.
Question 1: Is the will valid? [this
is about 60% of possible points]
NOTE: In answering this question, not discuss the details of intestacy
or who would receive the estate (if it arises). The only issue
here is the validity of the will.
Assume now that the will is valid and that the trust
went into effect for a period of ten years, until Bro died. Aunt
Tess was a housewife who had become a financial wizard through research
and study, which allowed her to turn her modest savings into a
substantial fortune. She decided that the trust needed a lot of
income to pay for Bro’s care. She therefore invested all of the
corpus in a diversified portfolio of high-yield stocks and
corporate bonds that produced above average income but did not
appreciate much in value. Overall, the trust’s stocks and bonds
produced better returns than the average trust during its 10 year
existence.
Even though the investments produced good
income, the cost of Bro’s care increased so much that Aunt Tess decided
to use some of the principal to pay for it. If she had not
invaded principal, she would have had to move Bro to a state hospital
or cheaper institution that would be less able to treat Bro’s condition.
After Bro’s death, representatives of Habitat come
to you, a newly minted lawyer, and ask if they have any basis to sue
Tess for breach of fiduciary duty. They are disappointed in the
small size of the trust remainder after Bro’s death.
Question 2: Did Tess breach any
fiduciary duties? [around 40%]