Hatch v. Riggs National Bank
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
361 F.2d 559 (1966)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Anna Hatch (plaintiff) created a spendthrift trust that paid her the income for life, then the principal as her will directed, otherwise to her next of kin. Forty years later, Hatch sought to revoke or modify the trust to take $5,000 principal annually. Hatch did not ask her two sisters and only heirs at law for consent. Instead, she sued trustee Riggs National Bank (defendant) claiming she held a reversion interest under the doctrine of worthier title, making her both sole beneficiary and settlor, so she could revoke or modify the trust. The district court denied Hatch’s request, reasoning the trust gave her heirs contingent interests in the corpus instead. Hatch appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Leventhal, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.
