Dear, et al. v. Boggan, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01711-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-29-2004 Opinion Author: Southwick, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wills, trusts, & estates - Express trust - Constructive trust Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges, P.J., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WILLS, TRUSTS AND ESTATES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-03-2002 Appealed from: Simpson County Chancery Court Judge: J. Larry Buffington Disposition: NO TRUST WAS ESTABLISHED Case Number: 97-0404 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | In the Matter of the Estates of Armine B. Gates and C. V. Gates, Deceased: Roland Dear and Lottie S. Causey |
DAVID RINGER |
||
| Appellee: | George Glynn Boggan, Sr., et al. (Heirs of Armine B. Gates) and Ruth B. Lewis, et al. (Heirs of C. V. Gates) | TERRELL STUBBS DAVID SESSUMS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wills, trusts, & estates - Express trust - Constructive trust |
| Summary of the Facts: | Armine and C. V. Gates expressed a desire to create a trust for Roland Dear and Lottie Causey. Mr. and Mrs. Gates were killed in an automobile accident, and a claim was filed in their estate proceedings that a trust had been created by the Gates to benefit Roland Dear, Lottie Causey, and two community churches. The trust document, which was never approved nor signed by either Gates, is dated after their deaths. The chancellor found that no trust existed, whether express or implied. Dear and Causey appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Dear and Causey argue that the court erred in refusing to admit into evidence hand-written notes allegedly written by Mrs. Gates which, they claim, represent declarations by Mrs. Gates as to what should be included in the written trust agreement. The attorney Owen testified that the notes were delivered to her by Mr. Gates and that she had never met or talked with Mrs. Gates. She stated that she believed the notes were written by Mrs. Gates, even though she did not witness the writing or discuss the notes with Mrs. Gates. Because the attorney’s only information was hearsay from Mr. Gates, the court did not err in refusing to admit the notes. Even if the notes had been admitted, they would not have been sufficient to impose a trust. If the corpus of the purported trust estate consists both of real and personal property, an express oral trust is ineffective to impose a trust on either. Dear and Causey also argue that the draft trust agreement itself, not signed by the Gates couple before their deaths, created an express trust. Not only must an express trust be in writing if it involves real property, but it must also be signed. Here, the trust document was not signed. A constructive trust arises in order to prevent unjust enrichment by a person gaining property which rightfully belongs to someone else. The attorney who prepared the trust document testified that she had no knowledge that either Mr. or Mrs. Gates had any indebtedness to the plaintiffs. She knew of no fraud practiced by the couple against those seeking to impose the trust and was not aware of any unconscionable conduct by them towards the plaintiffs. Causey and Dear had no contrary evidence. Therefore, there was no clear and convincing evidence of a constructive trust that should be imposed on the property that was in the estate. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
