From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...
In re Estate of Carter
Indiana Court of Appeals
760 N.E.2d 1171 (2002)
James Carter died before his wife, Lucile Clark. James’s will put property in a trust, with Lucile as a lifetime beneficiary. The trust’s property included a specific 16.19-acre parcel. James’s will also gave Lucile a power of appointment to distribute the trust’s assets through her own will to Robert Carter, Anne Carter, Junior Brownfield, or Virgie Brownfield (plaintiffs). This power of appointment had a specific-reference requirement, which required Lucile to specifically refer to the power when exercising it. At Lucile’s death, her will left the trust’s 16.19-acre parcel to Junior and Virgie Brownfield. However, the will did not specify that Lucile was exercising any power of appointment to accomplish this gift, let alone a specific power. Lucile’s estate (plaintiff) asked the court to determine whether the will’s gift of the property to the Brownfields was a valid exercise of Lucile’s power of appointment. The court determined that Lucile had clearly intended to exercise her power to appoint the trust’s property because she had given the trust’s property, the 16.19-acre parcel, to permitted appointees, the Brownfields. Therefore, even though Lucile had not expressly identified the gift as an exercise of her power of appointment, Lucile had validly exercised the power by using other language to convey her intent to exercise that specific power. Roger Carter (defendant) objected to the court’s finding and appealed. On appeal, Roger argued that Lucile could exercise the power of appointment only by expressly stating that she was doing exactly that and, therefore, that Lucile’s will had not validly appointed the 16.19-acre parcel to the Brownfields.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Garrard, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 617,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 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.