Woods v. Woods, 01-25.

• Decision Date: 20 December 2001
• Docket Number: No. 01-25.,01-25.
• Parties: Steven R. WOODS, Appellant (Defendant), v. Roger A. WOODS, Appellee (Plaintiff), and Marquietta C. Woods and Wells Fargo Bank Wyoming, N.A. Appellees (Intervenor).
• Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

36 P.3d 1142

2001 WY 131

Steven R. WOODS, Appellant (Defendant), v. Roger A. WOODS, Appellee (Plaintiff), and Marquietta C. Woods and Wells Fargo Bank Wyoming, N.A. Appellees (Intervenor).

No. 01-25.

Supreme Court of Wyoming.

December 20, 2001.

Bernard Q. Phelan, Cheyenne, WY, Representing Appellant.

No appearance, Representing Appellee Roger A. Woods.

Janet L. Tyler, Laramie, WY, Representing Appellee Marquietta C. Woods.

Peter K. Michael, Cheyenne, WY, Representing Appellee Wells Fargo Bank Wyoming, N.A.

Before LEHMAN, C.J., and GOLDEN, HILL, KITE, and VOIGT, JJ.

GOLDEN, Justice.

[¶ 1] Steven Woods appeals from a district court order denying his motion and petition for immediate distribution of the corpus of a trust. Finding that the order appealed from is not a final, appealable order, we dismiss this appeal.

ISSUES

[¶ 2] Steven Woods presents one issue as follows:

A trust agreement provided that distribution of the trust estate to named beneficiaries be made after all expenses attributable to the death of the grantor, all enforceable debts of the grantor, and "any estate or inheritance taxes" have been paid. May a court deny distribution to the beneficiaries if all conditions precedent have been met?

Appellees Wells Fargo Bank and Marquietta Woods reframe the issues thus:

I. Whether this appeal should be dismissed because there is no appealable order?

II. Whether the district court properly denied a beneficiary's motion for final distribution of trust real estate to the four beneficiaries as tenants in common?

FACTS

[¶ 3] In May 1997 Roger Woods filed an action against Steven Woods in district court styled "Complaint for Accounting and Declaratory Judgment." According to the allegations of the complaint, Raymond Woods, the father of Roger and Steven, had established a revocable trust. Upon the death of Raymond Woods in 1995, Roger and Steven became co-trustees of the trust. The beneficiaries of the trust are four adult children of Raymond Woods: Roger, Steven, Marquietta Woods, and Ronald Woods. Under the terms of the trust, the trust assets are to be distributed to the beneficiaries after the payment of certain expenses.

[¶ 4] Roger alleged in his complaint that, since the date of their father's death, Steven had refused to acknowledge Roger as a co-trustee, had refused to give Roger any information regarding the administration of the trust, and had refused to give Roger appropriate access to the trust records. Roger requested the district court enter a declaration of the rights of Roger as co-trustee and order an immediate accounting of the administration of the trust.

[¶ 5] Steven answered, denying all allegations against him, and included a counterclaim against Roger. In his counterclaim, Steven alleged that Roger had breached his fiduciary duty to the trust, and requested the court remove Roger as a co-trustee. Marquietta was allowed to intervene. In her motion for intervention, she requested the district court appoint a special master to provide an accounting and to establish a plan for distribution of the trust assets. She specifically requested that the district court retain jurisdiction over the trust until the trust assets are distributed and settled. Eventually, pursuant to a motion by Marquietta, the district court removed both Roger and Steven as co-trustees and appointed Norwest Bank, now Wells Fargo Bank, as the trustee. Wells Fargo was allowed to intervene in order to allow it to utilize the rules of civil procedure to compel production of records of trust assets.

[¶ 6] Wells Fargo submitted an interim accounting in January 1999, and in October 1999 made an interim distribution of some of the assets of the trust to the beneficiaries. Wells Fargo alleged that several issues needed to be resolved before a final accounting and complete distribution of the trust could be accomplished. In May 2000, Steven filed a motion demanding immediate, in-kind distribution of the trust corpus, relying upon the following terms of the trust agreement:

Article VI—Payments at death of grantor.

A. Upon the death of Grantor, Successor Trustee shall pay directly, or to Grantor's Personal Representatives as said Personal Representative shall direct, Grantor's funeral and burial expenses, claims legally enforceable against Grantor's Estate, expenses of administering Grantor's Estate including expenses of last illness, if any, attorney's and accountant's fees, if deemed necessary in the best judgment of Successor Trustee, and any estate and inheritance taxes payable by reason of Grantor's death. If no Personal Representative is appointed, Successor Trustee shall pay all such expenses directly out of the Trust Estate. . . .

B. After Grantor's death, and after making any payments necessary under the provisions of Paragraph A of this Article VI Successor Trustee shall, from the principal of the Trust Estate, transfer, convey and distribute equally to the Grantor's children, STEVEN R. WOODS, ROGER A. WOODS, RONALD

...