In re Trusteeship of Mayo
Minnesota Supreme Court
259 Minn. 91, 105 N.W.2d 900 (1960)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Dr. Charles Mayo established two trusts. Each trust directed the trustees (defendants) to invest the funds to maintain their value. However, the trusts prohibited the trustees from investing in corporate stock. Esther Mayo Hartzell (plaintiff), a beneficiary, petitioned the court to deviate from the restriction on corporate investments, in order to protect the funds from inflation. Given the significant changes to inflation since the trusts had been created, Hartzell presented evidence that if no deviation were permitted, the trusts would not keep up with inflation and in 20 years would be worth less than 25 percent of what they were worth at Mayo’s death. The trial court denied Hartzell’s petition. Hartzell appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dell, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
