In re Will of Crabtree

865 N.E.2d 1119 (2007)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Will of Crabtree

Massachusetts Supreme Court
865 N.E.2d 1119 (2007)

Facts

Lotta M. Crabtree, a wealthy actress, died in 1924, leaving a will that created several charitable trusts. Seven of the trusts, each of which was a separate entity with its own distinct purpose, were active at the time of this litigation. All seven of the trusts were administered by a group of professional trustees (the trustees) (defendants). The largest of the trusts was the agricultural-fund trust, established to assist students and graduates of the University of Massachusetts. Crabtree directed that the trust was to provide loans from the trust income to graduates of the university who wished to engage in agricultural pursuits. Any remaining trust income was to be distributed semiannually as financial aid for current university students. In 1987, contrary to the terms of the trust and without seeking court approval, the trustees created the Lotta M. Crabtree Endowment. The endowment was funded with contributions from the agricultural-education trust and was administered by the University of Massachusetts Foundation, Inc. The endowment used only some of the funds to provide financial aid to students, and it failed to make the required semiannual distributions of trust income. The trustees used the agricultural-fund trust as an operating account for the other trusts. The assets of the agricultural-fund trust were used to pay the administrative fees for all seven trusts, as well as the trustee fees for all of the trusts. At the end of each year, the other six trusts reimbursed the agricultural-fund trust, without interest, for all expenses except for the trustee fees. A court-appointed guardian ad litem alleged that the trustees had breached their fiduciary duties in administering the trust and that they had charged excessive trustee fees. The trial court agreed, removing the trustees and surcharging them for excessive fees. The court of appeals affirmed, and the trustees appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Marshall, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. 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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership