Long v. Tradesmens National Bank and Trust Company
| Decision Date | 03 March 1933 |
| Docket Number | 354-1932 |
| Citation | 108 Pa.Super. 363,165 A. 56 |
| Parties | Long et al., Appellant, v. Tradesmens National Bank and Trust Company |
| Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
Argued November 17, 1932
Appeal by plaintiffs from decree of C. P., No. 1, Philadelphia County, June T., 1932, No. 2026, in the case of Perry R Long, in his own right, and The Morton National Bank assignee of the said Perry R. Long v. Tradesmens National Bank and Trust Company.
Bill in equity to terminate a deed of trust. Before Kun, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
The court dismissed the bill. Plaintiffs appealed.
Error assigned, among others, was the decree of the court.
Reversed.
Israel K. Levy, and with him Bernard J. O'Connell, for appellant, cited: Culbertson's Appeal, 76 Pa. 145; Carson v. Fuhs, 131 Pa. 256; Stafford's Estate, 258 Pa. 595.
Carlyle H. Ross, for appellee, cited: Hemphill's Estate, 180 Pa. 95; Rynd v. Baker, 193 Pa. 486.
Before Trexler, P. J., Keller, Gawthrop, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld and Parker, JJ.
It makes little difference, in our opinion, in this case, whether the trust created by Long is active or passive, because no person but himself has any present or future interest in it. Where a trust is created for the benefit of another person, the question whether it is active or passive becomes of importance, for in the latter case, the cestui que trust, or beneficiary in trust, has the right to have it terminated for his benefit, and have the possession of the estate; while if it is active he does not have such right: Stafford's Est., 258 Pa. 595, 599, 102 A. 222. But where the trust is wholly for the convenience of the settlor, and is not made for his protection against intemperance or vicious habits, or as a spendthrift trust, etc., and there is no beneficiary named in it but himself, -- that is, no third person is given any interest in it -- either present or future -- the settlor can terminate it at any time, whether it is declared irrevocable for a term of years or not.
In this case the settlor transferred to the trustee the personal property scheduled in the writing (italics ours) "in trust to hold, manage, invest and re-invest the principal, to collect the income therefrom, and after deducting all necessary costs and charges to pay the net income therefrom unto the said Perry R. Long, the above settlor, during the term of his natural life, and after his death to pay, transfer, and convey the principal of said trust, together with all accumulated income thereof unto the Estate of Perry R. Long, the above settlor, so that the same will become a part of his estate and pass under his last will and testament: And in default of such last will and testament then to such person, or persons, as would be entitled to the same had the said Perry R. Long died a resident of Pennsylvania, and possessed thereof.
The settlor was the only person named or interested in the trust either as life tenant or remainderman, settlor or beneficiary. He was to receive all the net income during his life and at his death the principal was to be paid to his estate, -- not to such persons as he might appoint by will, -- but "unto the estate of Perry R. Long, the above settlor, so that the same will become a part of his estate, and pass under his last will and testament; and in default of such last will and testament, then to such person or persons as would be entitled to the same" . . . . under the intestate laws of Pennsylvania. That is, whoever gets the principal takes it not under the deed of trust as appointee of the settlor, but from the settlor's estate as his legatee or next of kin. No one but himself has any right, title, or interest in it, or voice or direction as regards it. The trust estate, principal and interest, is subject to levy and attachment for the settlor's debts: Nolan v. Nolan, 218 Pa. 135, 67 A. 52; Benedict v. Benedict, 261 Pa. 117, 104 A. 581; Mackason's App., 42 Pa. 330; Ghormley v. Smith, 139 Pa. 584, 21 A. 135; Rienzi v. Goodin, 249 Pa. 546, 95 A. 259; Phila. v. Meredith, 49 Pa.Super. 600.
It is not contended that this trust was created to protect the settlor against his intemperance or vicious habits, and it is not a spendthrift trust. See Rehr v. Fidelity-Phila. Trust Co., 310 Pa. 301, 165 A. 380.
In order to be irrevocable a voluntary trust deed must contain in it some benefit or advantage to others: Wilson v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fid. Union Trust Co. v. Parfner, 149/394.
...Trust Co. v. Miller, 2780 N.Y. 134, 15 N.E.2d 553; Engel v. Guaranty Trust Co., 280 N.Y. 43, 19 N.E.2d 673; Long v. Tradesmen's National Bank, 108 Pa.Super. 363, 165 A. 56. The present case is on the border line and even slight indications of intention may influence the result. Paragraph ‘d......
-
Weymouth v. Delaware Trust Co.
... ... 1 GEORGE T. WEYMOUTH, v. DELAWARE TRUST COMPANY, a corporation of the State of Delaware, and GEORGE T ... account of such beneficiary in a bank or trust company of ... good standing and responsibility, ... Co., (Mo.) 207 S.W. 788; Pacific ... National Bank v. Windram, 133 Mass. 175; McColgan v ... Walter ... holding are hot apparent. Compare: Long v ... Tradesmen's Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 108 Pa. Super ... ...
-
Manice v. Howard Sav. Institution
...has any interest in the res. Active trusts were involved in the Hamilton Trust Co. and Doyle cases, supra. See also Long v. Tradesmen's Nat. Bank & Trust Co., supra. Nor does the spendthrift trust provision preclude termination because a settlor cannot create a spendthrift trust for his own......
-
Collins v. Provident Trust Co.
...83 Pa. D. & C. 459 Collins v. Provident Trust Company of Philadelphia No. 227Common Pleas Court of Montgomery ... Co., 310 Pa. 301 (1932); Long et al. v. Tradesmens ... National Bank and Trust Company, ... ...