Preview:

[*1]


Decided on August 16, 2007
Sur Ct, Dutchess County

83510
Robert H. Goldie, Esq. Satterlee, Stephens, Burke & Burke, L.L.P. Attorneys for Petitioner The Bank of New York, Trustee 230 Park Avenue New York, New York 10169 William W. Frame, Esq. Corbally, Gartland & Rappleyea, LLP Attorneys for Objectant Randolph College 35 Market Street Poughkeepsie, New York 12601 Robert Molick, Esq. Assistant Attorney General State of New York Office of the Attorney General Charities Bureau 120 Broadway New York, New York 10271 James D. Pagones, J.
This petition for a decree determining whether the phrase in Article V, paragraph G of the decedent's will, dated June 21, 1983, "to the income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed" refers to his surviving daughters, Gillian Leonard and Sandra Leonard Starr, such that each of them will be identified as the remaindermen of one-half of the remaining trust estate established in Article V, is resolved as follows.
The only interested party to appear and file objections to the relief requested is Randolph College, successor in interest to Randolph-Macon Women's College. The college is a two-third residuary beneficiary under item III(D)(1) of the last will of Paula V. Leonard, the decedent's spouse. The beneficiary of the remaining one-third interest is Benedictine Foundation, located in Washington, D.C. The foundation has not participated in this proceeding. The will is dated July 3, 2002.
The decedent died a resident of Dutchess County on February 3, 1993. His will, dated June 21, 1983, was admitted to probate by decree on March 22, 1993. The decedent's spouse, Paula V. Leonard, died on October 17, 2006. Paula V. Leonard was the third wife of the decedent. He was also survived by two adult daughters. One daughter is the child by his first wife, and the other daughter is the child of his second wife. Paula V. Leonard had no children. Her will was admitted to probate on March 1, 2007.
Article V of the decedent's will establishes a testamentary trust through the residuary estate. Paragraph G of Article V is the subject of analysis in this proceeding. It provides:
"Notwithstanding anything set forth herein, the Trust shall terminate upon the later of (1) the date of my wife's death or (2) July 1, 1985, at which time the principal and any remaining interest shall be distributed to the income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed."
The issue is, who did the decedent intend to benefit when he designated "income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed" as the remainder beneficiaries of the trust?
Initially, the court notes that the testamentary trust is comprised of eight (8) lettered paragraphs. Paragraphs C and H contain contingencies which did not occur. However, the decedent does designate his daughters as the ultimate beneficiaries in the event either contingency took place.
The court's task is to ascertain the testator's intention from the words used in the trust instrument, and to give effect to that intention unless contrary to public policy or an established rule of law. (In re: Marine Midland Bank-Western, 55 AD2d 215 [4th Dept. 1976]; In re: Day's Trust, 10 AD2d 220 [1st Dept. 1960].) Language that is unambiguous and supports a reasonable meaning of a trust must be accepted as manifesting the grantor's intention. Therefore, the court is bound to such language and may not engage in rules of construction. (In re: Gouraud, 85 AD2d 342 [1st Dept. 1982] aff'd 59 NY2d 925 [1983].)
It is settled that the everyday and ordinary meaning of words reigns supreme when ascertaining the testator's intent. (Matter of Gustafson, 74 NY2d 448, 453 [1989].) The testator's intention is to be gleaned from the language of the instrument as a whole, not from [*2]detached portions alone, and contradictory clauses are, whenever possible, to be reconciled accordingly. (106 New York Jurisprudence 2d, Trusts,

Download 2007_51569.pdf

New York Law