California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

McKenzie v. Vanderpoel, B186768

Denial of plaintiff's application for an order determining that her proposed action of making annual adjustments between principal and interest of her share of a trust would not violate the no contest clause is affirmed as: 1) the availability of a statutory procedure under the California Uniform Principal and Income Act to reallocate principal and income does not exempt the adjustment petition from the scope of the trust's no contest clause; and 2) the adjustment petition would impair the trust by guaranteeing plaintiff a minimum income and by allowing the trustee to reallocate assets from principal which is to be reserved to the third tier beneficiaries.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 06/13/2007
  • Published 06/13/2007

Judges

  • EPSTEIN, P.J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Price, Postel & Parma and Timothy E. Metzinger for Plaintiff and Appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Epstein, Turner & Song, David B. Epstein and Adam C. Scardina for Defendants and Respondents Vivien Vanderpoel, Paul L. Potter, and Phyllis M. Potter., Arthur W. Carlson for Defendants and Respondents Fred Astaire, Jr., Fred Henry Astaire, Johanna Astaire, and John Astaire.
Copied to clipboard