California Court of Appeal

In a case in which a grandson filed a petition with the superior court alleging that his father's attempted exercise of a power of appointment under the grandfather's 1955 will by excluding the grandson from any share of the appointed property exceeded the scope of authority the grandfather gave the father, the superior court's dismissal of the petition is reversed, where: 1) given the state of the law in 1955, it had to be presumed that the grandfather and his attorney intended that the power of appointment in his will be nonexclusive; 2) the legislature intended that the original intent of a donor that a power of appointment created before 1970 was nonexclusive was to remain unaffected by the provisions of the California Powers of Appointment Act; and 3) the petition was timely filed.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/31/2012
• Published 05/31/2012

Judges

• Nares

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Van Dyke & Associates, Beamer, Lauth, Steinley & Bond