Cate-Schweyen v. Cate
Montana Supreme Court
303 Mont. 232 (2000)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
In 1988, Jerome J. Cate drafted a handwritten document entitled “Irrevocable Trust Reserving Income for Life.” The document purported to transfer mineral interests that Jerome had inherited from his mother and uncle to a trust benefitting Jerome’s daughters from his first marriage. The document named Jerome’s daughter Shannon Cate-Schweyen (plaintiff) trustee and granted Jerome a life interest in the trust property. The document granted the daughters a 20-year-term interest after Jerome’s death, followed by an outright distribution of any remaining property to the daughters or their heirs, per stirpes. Jerome specified that the document was made in contemplation of his pending marriage to JoAnn Cate (defendant). Jerome never executed a separate document conveying the mineral interests to the trust to or to Shannon as trustee. After Jerome’s death, JoAnn was appointed personal representative of his estate and refused to transfer the mineral interests to his daughters. Shannon, on her own behalf and as conservator of her sister Sara, petitioned the trial court for a declaration that the handwritten document had created a valid testamentary trust and that JoAnn was required to fund the trust with the mineral interests. JoAnn opposed the petition, arguing that the document had created an inter vivos trust that was unenforceable because Jerome had failed to fund the trust during his lifetime. The trial court found for Shannon, and JoAnn appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nelson, J.)
Dissent (Turnage, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.