From our private database of 31,100+ case briefs...
In re Elizabeth J. K. L. Lucas Charitable Gift
Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
261 P.3d 800 (2011)
Facts
Elizabeth Lucas created a charitable trust that gave an interest in a particular piece of property to the Hawaiian Humane Society (Humane Society) (plaintiff) to create an educational reserve to preserve the environment and educate the public. If the property was not used in this way, Lucas stated, the land was to go to the state of Hawaii (plaintiff) to use as a public park. After many years of researching possible solutions, the Humane Society, the state, and Lucas’s heirs (plaintiffs) all agreed that the land was not usable as either an educational reserve or a public park. Instead, the parties proposed a plan to give some land to the state for nonpublic environmental uses and to sell the remaining land to the heirs. The sale proceeds would create a fund for the Humane Society to use for general educational purposes. The parties sought the probate court’s approval of the proposed deal, arguing that the cy pres doctrine allowed this modification of the trust’s terms. However, the court ruled that if the Humane Society could not use the land as intended, the entire land interest should go to the state as the alternate recipient. The Humane Society appealed, and no party opposed the appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Leonard, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 557,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 31,100 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
