Catch

Catch v. Phillips

Good Law
73 Cal. App. 4th 648·86 Cal. Rptr. 2d 584
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 27, 1999H018483California4,046 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elia, J.

In this case, we consider whether an exercise of a power of

appointment was valid even though it was not exercised by will or codicil as required by the terms of the trust. (Prob. Code, §§ 630, 631.) The trial court determined that the exercise was invalid and granted respondent Jack Catch’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. Allan Phillips appeals. For reasons we will explain, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural Background

J. D. Mayer and Esther Catch Mayer established the 1983 Mayer Trust. After J. D. Mayer died in 1992, the trust estate was divided into three separate trusts, known as Trust A, Trust B, and Trust C.

Esther could revoke Trust A during her lifetime. Esther was also granted a general testamentary power of appointment over Trust A. Specifically, the trust provided, “After the death of the surviving Trustor, the Trustee shall distribute all or any part of the balance of Trust A to or for the benefit of such one or more persons or entities, including the estate of the surviving Trustor, on the terms and conditions, either outright or in Trust, as the surviving Trustor may appoint by a Will or Codicil thereto specifically referring to and exercising power…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.